THE LORD’S TABLE & THE LORD’S SUPPER

Dr. GEORGE P. KOSHY

THE LORD’S TABLE & THE LORD’S SUPPER George P. Koshy, Ph.D, FASQ

Published by

LOGOS MEDIA P.B. No.8, Mulanthuruthy Phone: 9744041614, E-mail: [email protected]

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pages Preface Chapter I “Until He Come”

6

“Ye Announce the Death of the Lord”

10

“As Often As Ye Shall Eat This Bread, and Drink the Cup”

13

Is There a Difference Between “The Lord’s Table” And “The Lord’s Supper?”

16

“This Cup Is the New Covenant in My Blood”

27

“This Is My Body, Which Is For You”

34

“The Night in Which He Was Delivered Up”

40

Chapter II Chapter III Chapter IV Chapter V Chapter VI Chapter VII Chapter VIII Lord’s Table, Lord’s Supper, and Worship

43

Chapter VIII Head-covering

55

Appendix

57 Some Questions Asked in Connection With the Lord’s Supper:

3

63

PREFACE This book is the product of certain person asking a question on an internet Forum on 21/1/2004. Part of his question was, “At the Lord’s Table many a time we find morose countenance projecting morbidity to languish the death of Jesus Christ. …” When I read it, I wondered why he asked the unknown many on that forum about it in such a way. Especially, it communicated an idea that others on the forum were persons with such countenance and the author of that question wanted those with such a countenance at the Lord’s Table to comment on appropriateness of their behavior. If that was not the assumption made by the author of the question, then he wants us to judge an unknown or even a non-existing person. This book is the outcome of our dialog on the subject of Lord’s Supper. In Acts 20 we read that the disciples gathered together to break bread on the first day of the week. In 1 Corinthians 11 we read that they gathered together in one place and from 16:2 we learn that his was also on the first day of the week. What was established by god and practiced by the Apostles and followed by the early Christians, as recorded in the Word of God, should not be changed by any in the 21st century. In the “History of the Christian Church” by Philip Schaff we read that it was John Calvin who changed the observance of the Lord’s Supper from every first day of the week to the first Sunday of every month. His justification was that too much familiarity will reduce the importance of the Lord’s Supper. When he made this change, he also replaced the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week with hymn singing and preaching. These days many Christians think that hymn singing and hearing a preacher is what is more important than remembering the Lord’s death till he come. It is those who have such a man-made misconception manufacture statements similar to what I quoted from 2004. I hope that this book will help many who have a desire and guidance of the Holy Spirit to obey our Lord’s desire as He stated on that night in which He was betrayed. That is to remember His death till He come. We read about its institution by the Lord in the Gospels and its doctrinal aspects in Acts and 1 Corinthians. The minimum requirement is that we should observe it on the first day of the week. Those who think that testimonial meetings about themselves to tell others about their wealth and comforts, to listen to others singing to others, and to listen to other preachers are those who make it a maximum requirement. After that, they device explanations to reduce the observance of remembering the Lord’s death as He wants to less frequent. I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. Saneesh Cherian for translating this book into Malayalam. Without his help, the dispersion of this information would not have been possible. I also thank Dr. Johnson C. Philip for the help he rendered in the process of translation. He was a great help in providing suggestions in translating idioms and phrases from English into Malayalam. I am indebted to: W.H. Bennett, J.N. Darby, Y. Ezekiel, A.P. Gibbs, F.W. Grant, W.T. Grant, C. Hodge, W.H. Hunter, F.C. Jennings, W. Kelly, J.R. Littleproud, H.G. Mackay, C.H. Mackintosh, A.P. Mathew, E.J. Mathew, Philip Schaff, Thomas Scott, S. Scott, W. Scott, K.V. Simon, D. Smith, C. Stanley, J.H. Thayer, W. Trotter, M.F. Unger, W.E. Vine, and W.T.P. Wolston in writing this little book on the vast subject, The Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper. Ezekiel Sar’s guidance in the early years my Christian life is not forgettable. Dr. A.P. Mathew’s caring and loving guidance and his perseverance is what provided the firm foundation from the Word of God on this subject. Without that, I could not have provided this explanation as you will be reading in the following few pages.. I also wish to express my gratitude to Brother James Cherian for publishing most of this book in Suviseshakan. I also express my appreciation to my wife Alice G. Koshy for her patience in bearing with me to make this work possible. I dedicate this work in the loving memory of Y. Ezekiel Sar who helped me to learn the truth when I was young.

4

FOREWORD

We live in times when an increasing number of people cry for fundamental doctrines. Strangely, the same is the time when an increasing number of people have started to abandon serious Bible study in favour of five-minute devotionals. Worse, these little devotionals are filled with such seductive power that they give the impression of spirituality while at the same time they are actually robbing Christians of their spiritual mind and biblical world-view. Thus it is time for all Bible-believing Christians to go back to a serious study of doctrinal subjects. And here one faces the first problem. Christian bookshops and the internet are flooded with books, but the majority of them only have an appearance of doctrine. Actually they serve to take people away from the truth rather than building them in it. Worse, an exposure to them for a long time makes people who entertain error to believe that they are the guardians of truth. In such a generation, men like Dr. George P. Koshy are a most welcome phenomenon. I "met" him about half a dozen years ago on the net. It was my love for the fundamentals that attracted me to his writing. Soon I discovered that he is a meticulous student of the Scriptures. His book on the Lord's supper is a most welcome addition to the minority of books which I can recommend to the present generation. It is biblical in content, and simple in presentation. I recommend this book to all who love the Great Book and the Lord of the Book. Dr. Johnson C. Philip Chancellor, Scofield Graduate School of Theology

5

Chapter I

“Until He Come” “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke [it], and said, This is my body, which [is] for you, this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink [it], in remembrance of me. For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26) During the past several months, I saw two separate postings on an Internet forum where the Lord’s Table or Lord’s Supper as observed in the assemblies were referred to with demeaning terms. In one, it was “At the Lord’s Table many a time we find morose countenance projecting morbidity to languish the death of Jesus Christ…” The other was that the Sunday services are “like attending funeral service,” followed by characterization of the participants as “zombie corps on the wooden pew.” These two postings are not limited to what is in India, but also in USA and elsewhere. This kind of characterization is not limited to one forum. I have seen similar writings in other forums too. After answering those posting, I pondered about the condition of those persons who made those statements along with the cause that prompted them to make such statements. Through these writings, I wish to present to you some of my thoughts on the Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper. I hope that it will be helpful to all those who cherish to remember the death of the Lord till he come as commanded by Him. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 we read, “For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come.” It clearly tells us that the activity is anchored on the personal hope of believers, the hope in the promise of His coming. It is usually claimed that a person at his or her death goes to heaven. In the scriptures, we do not read any one going to heaven at his/her death. This idea is a well-placed lie of the deceiver. We read that a believer is to be with Christ at his/her death. Death is not something, which a Christian should be looking forward to, or prepare for it. It is to be with the Lord that is our hope and what we should be looking forward to and be prepared for. In Ephesians 2:6 we read that a Christian is already in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus. In Phil.3:20 we understand that our citizenship is in heaven. In Ephesians 6:12 we are asked to fight against the principalities and powers of heaven. This is our current position, in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus. Only those who accept the fact that we were dead in Christ and raised with Him (Col.3:3; Romans 6:1-4) are able to look forward to the coming of the Lord, especially at the breaking of the bread. In the scriptures, the Christians are repeatedly reminded of the coming of the Lord. It affects the living and the dead. Our Lord Jesus Christ taught His disciples that He would return in passages, such as Mat. 24:64; Luke 19:12, 13; and John 14:1-3. Matthew 24:3 indicates that the return of the Lord was the subject discussed at other occasions, as well. Such frequency of discussions was prompted by the questions from the disciples about His coming or establishing His kingdom. It held such an important place in Christ’s own teaching. At His ascension the disciples were reminded of the truth of His return by the angels in Acts 1:11. The Holy Spirit through the apostles taught the early Christians to wait for the coming of the Lord. When the theme of His return is given to the New Testament saints, there appears another fact. It is a “mystery” hidden from the Old Testament saints and prophets. It was hinted by Jesus Christ but expounded clearly by Apostle Paul. In the Old Testament, the Messiah - Lord Jesus Christ - was to come as the King of Israel. When He comes as the King

6

of Israel, He is to come with the saints (Zech. 14:5). Who are these saints? The Old Testament is silent about it. It is imperative that before the Lord Jesus Christ comes to reign over the earth as the King of Israel, His saints are to be taken from this earth and joined to Him. This is what we read in John 14:1-3, from the Lord Himself. “For I go to prepare you a place; and if I go and shall prepare you a place, I am coming again and shall receive you to myself, that where I am ye also may be” (John 14:3). It was said at the night of His betrayal. The Lord’s Supper for His memory was instituted at the night in which He was betrayed. He relieved the disciples mind by stating about the abodes that He will build and to which they will be taken. This taking was of a permanent in nature and not a temporary one. The permanency of His work as opposed to the temporary nature of the earthly abode was the message. This was not concerning the death of a saint, because at death the believer goes to be with Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ never comes for the believer. Death is not the blessed hope of a believer, but the redemption of the body is. The coming of the Lord is neither a departure to be with Jesus at death, nor His appearing at the end of the ages is to be the King of Israel. It is to receive us to be with Him forever. Shortly after the disciples were told about the departure and coming of the Lord, He also tells them about them following Him in death and later He bids them not to be surprised if one of them tarries till He comes. Thus He indicated to them that there is more than one part to His coming, as they know. First, His return for the saints is neither at their death nor at the end of age. Secondly, this coming again might occur before the death of the saints, but the time is uncertain. Additional information about the coming of the Lord for the saints is given in the New Testament through Apostle Paul. The Corinthian Christians were told, “So that ye come short of no gift, awaiting the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall also confirm you to the end, unimpeachable in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 1:7-8). “Behold, I tell you a mystery: we shall not all fall asleep, but we shall all be changed, in an instant, in [the] twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised in corruptible, and we shall be changed” (1 Corinthians 15:51-52). To Galatians, “For we, by [the] Spirit on the principle of faith, await the hope of righteousness” (Gal. 5:5). To Philippians, “For our commonwealth has its existence in [the] heavens, from which also we await the Lord Jesus Christ [as] Savior, who shall transform our body of humiliation into conformity to his body of glory” (Phil. 3:20-21). The Thessalonians were told that their turning from the idols to God was to await the coming of the Son from heavens. “And how ye turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God, and to await his Son from the heavens, whom he raised from among the dead, Jesus, our deliverer from the coming wrath.” (1 Thess. 1:9-10). “For this we say to you in [the] word of [the] Lord, that we, the living, who remain to the coming of the Lord, are in no way to anticipate those who have fallen asleep; for the Lord himself, with an assembling shout, with archangel’s voice and with trump of God, shall descend from heaven; and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we’ the living who remain, shall be caught up together with them in [the] clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall be with the Lord for ever.” (1 Thess. 4:15-17) In Hebrews we read, “Thus the Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear to those that look for him the second time without sin for salvation” (Heb. 9:28). There are two interpretations about the Lord’s coming as stated in Mat. 24:64; Luke 19:12, 13; and John 14:1-3; Acts 1:11; 1 Corinthians 1:7-8; 15:51-52; Gal. 5:5; Phil. 3:20-21; 1 Thess. 1:9-10; 4:15-17; Heb. 9:28 and other places in the scriptures. The first interpretation is with the assumption that the Assembly, the body and bride of Christ, as the spiritual Israel and assumes that the Old Testament prophesies are and for the Assembly. Therefore, they take the fulfillments of the prophecies are abstract and spiritual. They believe in a universal spread of Christianity. The New Testament teachings are on the contrary. It foretells and warns about the invading corruption that leads to judgment in the professing body of Christians (Revelation 2 & 3). Those who hold this corrupt interpretation also give a lower priority to the Lord’s Table and Lord’s Supper. They may reserve the first day of the week for singing and preaching and not for remembering the Lord’s death till He

7

come. They will justify their decision and action on the phrase, “As often as you do,” and dismiss the scriptural tradition of remembering the Lord’s death on the first day of the week (Acts 2, 20; 1 Corinthians 11:17). The other interpretation is that the Assembly was hidden in God and is revealed by Jesus Christ in the New Testament through Apostle Paul. They also believe that many Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in Lord Jesus Christ at His incarnation, His first coming. They also believe that the Old Testament prophecies and promises to Israel are to be fulfilled literally in connection with Israel. To this second group of Christians, the prospect of our Lord’s coming is the prominent thought, while there is gloom around them. His coming is the bright hope for their hearts that are tossed in the billows and waves of this world. In Matthew 24 and Luke 19 we read about the coming of the Lord Jesus as the King of Israel, while in John 14 and the epistles, we read about His coming for the Assembly, the saints. This is our blessed hope. The Israel’s hope is the coming of the Lord as their King. Confounding these two as one will create confusion and errors in interpretations. We should not interpret the prophecies in a frivolous inquisitive spirit. Those who do so are those who turn a deaf ear to God’s promises and warnings. Having done so, they become guilty of the irreverence and errors that they censure in others. What is the object of prophecy? It is to unfold God’s purposes with respect to the glory of His only begotten Son, as we read in Revelation 19:10, “For the spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus.” Man rejected Him, but God exalted Him. Man refused to bend their knees to Him, but God demands that every knee should bow to Him. In contemplating these, God’s demands, we who are His chosen ones are invited to share the one bread and one cup till He come. The life of the New Testament saints is in relation to the coming of the Lord. The Philippians were told, “Let your gentleness be known to all men, the Lord [is] near” (Phil. 4:5). The love of the saints to one another reaches its zenith at the coming of the Lord, “But you may the Lord make to exceed and abound in love toward one another, and toward all, even as we also towards you, in order to the confirming of your hearts unblamable in holiness before our God and Father at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints” (1 Thess. 3:12-13). In 1 Thessalonians 5:23 the sanctification of believers are in preparation for the coming of the Lord. “Now the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and your spirit, and soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Paul wrote to Timothy, “Thou keep the commandment spotless, irreproachable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Tim. 6:14). Peter wrote, “And when the chief shepherd is manifested ye shall receive the unfading crown of glory” (1 Peter 5:4). John wrote, “And now, children, abide in him, that if he be manifested we may have boldness, and not put to shame from before him at his coming” (1 John 2:28). The coming of the Lord is termed as the blessed hope and the reason for us to live as His children in this world, “For the grace of God which carries with it salvation for all men has appeared, teaching us that, having denied impiety and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, and justly, and piously in the present course of things, awaiting the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:11-13). In Hebrews 3:6 we are asked to hold fast the boldness and the boast of our hope firm to the end. In Hebrews 6:18 we read about the hope that is set before us. We are asked to flee to that hope for our refuge. There may be a reference to the Cities of Refuge that were built by Joshua after entering into the Promised Land. John asked us to purify ourselves because of the hope that is in us, “And every one that has this hope in him purifies himself even as he is pure” (1 John 3:3). We are told that the adoption, redemption, and salvation will be completed at the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ for the saints. Romans 8:15 and Galatians 4:5 tell us that our adoption is a past experience that we received along with the Holy Spirit. “For ye have not received a spirit of bondage again for fear, but ye have received a spirit of adoption” (Romans 8:15). “God sent forth his Son, come of woman, come under law, that he might redeem those under law, that we might receive adoption” (Galatians 4:5). In Romans 8:23 we read that the adoption is a future event. “And not only [that], but even we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the

8

Spirit, we also ourselves groan in ourselves, awaiting adoption, [that is] the redemption of our body.” It also tells us that the adoption of our body will be at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. There the redemption of our body is also mentioned in the same manner. Romans 13:11 tells us that our salvation is nearer than when we first believed. In 1 Peter 1:5 we are told that the salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. In Luke 21:28 we read, “But when these things begins to come to pass, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws nigh.” The adoption, redemption, and salvation reach its climax at the union of the Assembly, the bride, with the Bridegroom at the marriage of the Lamb. The Assembly that Christ loved and purchased will be made without spot and wrinkle and the friends of the Groom will see the one comes from the wilderness leaning on her Beloved. This is the glorious hope of the believers connected with our salvation, redemption, and adoption. The consistent teaching in the New Testament is that the Christians are not only to look back at a Savior who died on Calvary, but also to look forward to the same Savior who was to come. This can be compared to a Christian who is on a bridge that is anchored on one end on the truth of a Savior who died, rose from the dead, and ascended to the Father. On the other end, the same bridge is anchored on the hope of His return. A gospel that was preached by the apostles contained both these truths. Therefore, we are told in breaking the bread at the Lord’s Table in Lord’s Supper, we are “announcing the death of the Lord till he come.” The hope of the believers is to be announced and this announcement is an integral and inseparable part of the breaking of bread. There is another interesting scripture we should look into. In Matthew 23:39 our Lord Jesus Christ said in His prophesy regarding Jerusalem and Israel, “Ye shall in no wise see me henceforth until ye say, Blessed be he that comes in the name of [the] Lord.” There seeing Him by Israel is connected with “until ye say.” When our Lord entered into Jerusalem on the donkey only a few did say that about Him. Many, including the religious leaders, did not say that. Therefore, His coming to deliver them is still a future event and we are told that Israel will say that He is the one who comes in the name of Jehovah and He is the Blessed One. In 1 Corinthians 11:26, we are exhorted to announce the Lord’s death until he comes. To Israel, He will not come until they say or announce, but to us we are to announce His death until He comes. To Israel for them to see Him was conditional upon them say, “Blesses be he that comes in the name of the Lord.” To us, His coming is not conditional, but our celebration of the Lord’s Supper is an announcement of the Lord’s death in connection with our hope of His return. These two comings, for us and Israel, are not the same. In our case, it is as He told the disciples in John 14:1-3. It is to take us to be with Him forever. To Israel, it was at a later date to rule over them and we will be with Him. The end of this observation of the Lord’s Supper is His coming for the Assembly in the air. We are announcing our faith on a living Lord Jesus Christ who is seated at the right hand of God. At the same time, we are announcing His death by which we are reconciled to God to receive the promise that our transgressions and sins are remembered no more.

9

Chapter II

“Ye Announce the Death of the Lord” “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke [it], and said, This is my body, which [is] for you, this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink [it], in remembrance of me. For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26) Previously we saw that the Lord’s Supper is indubitably an announcement, a declaration, of the death of the Lord and the participants’ hope of the return of the Lord Jesus Christ as He promised and attested and repeated by apostles in their epistles. The manifestation of His love is seen in His desire to make His elect ones participants in His plan for them by making it their hope. His desire is stated in His prayer to the Father in John 17:24. “Father, [as to] those whom thou hast given me, I desire that where I am they also may be with me, that they may behold my glory which thou hast given me before [the] foundation of [the] world.” At the Lord’s Supper He desires us to remember His death and not the blessings that we derived from Him. The Son glorified the Father and the Father glorified the Son at His death and not at the earthly goods that we received. The Father is glorified at His coming also. Therefore, we are to partake in the Lord’s Supper till He comes. The mode of observance of the Lord’s Supper is not as practiced by those who observe it. It must be observed as “I have received from the Lord.” Apostle Paul did not stop it there, he continued, “That which I also delivered to you” (1 Corinthians 11:23). It was the Lord who instituted the Lord’s Supper in His memory. It is the Lord who delivered it to Apostle Paul to deliver it not only to the saints at Corinth, but also to “all that in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 1:2). The Lord’s Supper brings us to the presence of the death of Christ - His broken body and His shed blood. There we see our Lord Jesus Christ as one who died for us; but there is no dead Christ. Our Lord Jesus Christ wants us to remember Him as the one who died for us. That is why He said, “Do this in remembrance of me.” This remembrance is not a remembrance of Christ living in heaven. In this activity of remembering Christ, we are asked to eat the bread and drink the cup and should do that separately. One may sing about the Lord’s death. One may read about the Lord’s death. One may say a few words of exhortation about the Lord’s death. One may hear about the Lord’s death. One may pray about the Lord’s death. In all these he is not announcing the Lord’s death. It is only in the Lord’s Supper one “announces” the Lord’s death. Since, this is an announcement, before whom or to whom is this announcement being made about the Lord’s death? There could be at least three different, distinct, and separate groups before whom these announcements are made. They are: the world, those who are gathered to break bread, and God and the heavenly hosts. Let us look into each of them briefly. If we say that there are none this to be announced, then it is an anomaly. Why we are announcing something, when there are none to hear or see the announcement and to be a witness to it? In King James Version we read 1 Corinthians 11:26 as, “Ye do show the Lord’s death till He come.” One may say that there is a big difference between “announcing” and “showing.” In Geek we read, “τον θανατον του Κυριο καταγγελετε” (it is read as, TON THANTON TOU KURIOU KATAGGELETE) and its literal translation is, ‘the death of the Lord you declare.’ The Greek word καταγγελω (KATAGGELO) means, ‘to

10

declare thoroughly.’ We are to declare the Lord’s death. It is more than showing. Therefore, I used, “Ye announce the Lord’s death till He come.” Now, let us look in detail about to whom do we announce the Lord’s death. First, it is the world to which we announce the death of the Lord till He come. We are gathering together unto the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in this world. By the act of remembering the death of the Lord, we are announcing our faith in His death as our substitute to this world. This will continue only till He comes to receive us to be with Him. The world is outside the place of gathering. They are in the darkness of night. We also read in John 13:30 that Judas left immediately after receiving the morsel from the Lord. This morsel is not the bread that the Lord broke and told the disciples that it is His body. It is the sop, the bread soaked in bitter herbs – a requirement of Passover meal (Exodus 12:8) that was given to Judas to identify him as the one who will deliver Him to the Jews. There we also read, “It was night,” when Judas left. He went into the darkness of the night away from the Light that came into this world (John 1:9). Those who are in the darkness of this world are not welcomed to the Lord’s Supper. They are outside and know that we are with the Lord. Judas knew that the Lord was talking about His death and identified him as the betrayer. He knew what was going on inside the upper room, but he was not a part of it. This is the condition of this world to which we announce the Lord’s death, till He come. Only Judas went out into the darkness, because he received not the Light (John 1:9-10). All other disciples stayed with the Light that came into the world, because they received Him (John 1:12-13). Those who stayed in the Light are called the children of God. As the children of God, we announce the Lord’s death till He come at the Lord’s Table by partaking the Lord’s Supper. Gathering around the Lord’s Table to eat the Lord’s Supper is a family gathering and is the responsibility of the family members. It is limited only to those who are of the household of faith, who have the right to be called the children of God. In this connection we read that the one-loaf is a figure of the one-body in 1 Corinthians 10:17. It is for every one of them. It is not for any one else. Second, we announce the Lord’s death to one another as those who died and rose with Him. In doing so, we are also announcing our hope of His return in the air to receive us to be with Him for ever as in John 14:13. We are telling each other that our hearts are not troubled in the remembrance of the Lord’s death, but we rejoice in raising us up with Him. While we are in this world, we must be careful not to deviate from the purpose of our gathering together to remember the Lord Jesus Christ. Such a situation was present at Corinth. Paul wrote, “When ye come therefore together into one place, it is not to eat [the] Lord’s Supper” (1 Corinthians 11:20). They came together to show their unity of sectarian relationship as we read in the previous verses, especially in chapter 1. We should come together at the Lord’s Table to eat the Lord’s Supper. We are not to eat our own supper of gratification of groupism. If we do so, then some will be hungry and others will be filled. When we are engaged in announcing the Lord’s death and our hope of His return, then all eat and are filled at the Lord’s Table by partaking of the Lord’s Supper. Having said these two aspects of participating at the Lord’s Supper, there is another aspect that is far more superior to these two. Third, this announcement of the Lord’s Death till He comes is at a higher sphere. We must rise to a higher sphere, the real place of our worship, the place we are seated in Christ. “Has quickened us with the Christ, (ye are saved by grace,) and has raised [us] up together, and has made [us] sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:5-6). This place is in the real place of our worship, though we are on this earth. If we are placed in the heavenlies, then we are in the company of angels, principalities, and powers. Is this all? Above everything, we are in the company of the Almighty God, who is above all those who are present. We are in Christ Jesus. Our place is above the angles, principalities, and powers. They are gazing it our devotion to our Lord and His grace towards us. Therefore, apostle Paul by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit wrote about, “on account of angels,” in 1 Corinthians 11:10. This reminding about the presence of the angels came before the Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:20) and after the Lord’s Table (1 Corinthians 10:21). The angels, principalities, and powers are wondering as they witness the re-establishment of primal order of creation in the Assembly. The risen and glorified Christ is the head of the Assembly. The Assembly is the body that is

11

joined to that glorified head by the Holy Spirit at the Day of Pentecost. They ‘desire to look into’ this great work of God in Christ through the Holy Spirit. A woman’s head should not lessen the solemnity of such an event as participating in the Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:10); therefore it must be covered. As we are placed in the heavenlies in Christ, what must be the Lord’s death for the Father? Remember, we are showing His death in eating the Lord’s Supper. When we realize this aspect of eating the Lord’s Supper, we will be struck with awe and words will fail to express this solemn event. Only the Holy Spirit can communicate the greatness of this solemn activity of ours. Let us try to understand the immense magnitude of the importance of the Lord’s death to the Father from two incidents in the life of Jesus Christ our Lord. Concerning His death our Lord said, “I have a baptism to be baptized with,” (Luke 12:50). If He said that His death is a baptism, then we should look at two occasions that deals with those two subjects, baptism and death. The first is the baptism as written in Matthew 3:13-17. When John was baptizing on the shores of Jordan, he saw Jesus coming to him to be baptized. Being filled with astonishment John uttered, “I have need to be baptized of thee; and comest thou to me?” There, John takes his place before his Lord and asks the Lord to baptize him. What was the Lord’s reply? “Suffer [it] now; for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness.” The righteousness of God was manifested in the death of His Son for our sin. The baptism was a figure of that death. That is why our Lord said, “Thus becometh us to fulfill all righteousness.” This showing of death in baptism was the reason why the Father in infinite emotion tore the heavens and declared, “This is my well beloved Son, in whom I have found favor.” At the same time, the Holy Spirit descended on the Son, as a dove. If we have not thought about it that way, now let us think how much the Father delights when we announce the death of His dear Son, according to the manner in which He asked us to do? The appointed place is the gathering of His saints. The appointed time is “as often as,” and the apostles and the early Christians showed the time as the first day of the week (Acts 20 and 1 Corinthians 11:20 and 16:1). The second time the heavens were opened is on Mount Transfiguration, when Moses and Elias talk with the Lord about His death that is to take place in Jerusalem (Mark 9 and Luke 9). There the Father said, “This is my beloved Son: hear him.” When the baptism was a figure of His death, it was about how pleased the Father was in the son. When death was the subject of discussion on Mount Transfiguration, the Father asked the disciples to hear Him. If the Father was so vocal about His Son’s death before it happened on Calvary, how much will He be interested when we remember our Lord’s, His beloved Son’s, death at the appointed time and place? In what spirit do we break bread? Are we quite satisfied? Is it pleasing to the Father? Do we realize that we are announcing the death of the Lord Jesus Christ in the presence of the Father, guided by the Holy Spirit, before the angels, principalities, and powers? Let us esteem each other better than ourselves (Phil. 2:3), when we break the bread in the memory of the Lord’s death before the Father. The most distinct, important, and exclusive aspect of our coming together is to announce in the very presence of the Father the “Lord’s death” directly and our faith in His coming indirectly. Nothing should take this solemnity away from us.

12

Chapter III

“As Often As Ye Shall Eat This Bread, and Drink the Cup” “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke [it], and said, This is my body, which [is] for you, this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink [it], in remembrance of me. For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26) In the Lord’s Supper we are announcing the Lord’s death and our faith in the Lord’s promise of His return to this world, among those who partake of it. Over and above these, it is an announcement before God in the presence of the angles, principalities, and powers. How often are we expected to do this? The Holy Spirit has not given the precise number as a minimum number in the scriptures. But the minimum requirement for this observation is given. This minimum requirement is given by the day of remembrance. In 1 Corinthians 11 we read, “That ye come together” (11:17), “When ye come together in assembly” (11:18), and “When ye come therefore together into one place, it is not to eat [the] Lord’s Supper” (11:20). This along with 1 Corinthians 11:23 indicates that it is the meeting of the Christians at Corinth to remember the Lord in the Lord’s Supper being the subject. In Acts 20:7 we read, “And the first day of the week, we being assembled to break bread.” It was the custom of the Christians to assemble together to break bread in memory of the Lord Jesus Christ on the first day of the week. At Troas, Paul waited seven days to break bread with the saints (Acts 20:6). That tells us that Paul reached Troas on the second day of the previous week (our Monday) and waited for seven days for the next first of the week to come. This would have been the best opportunity to tell us that any other day is as good as the first day of the week for breaking of bread in remembrance of the death of the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul could have ordered the saints to come together on the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, or the seventh day of the week to break bread with him. He did not do that and we should not change it any other day either. Those who point to the phrase, “As often as you do,” to justify changing the observation of the Lord’s death from the first day of the week to any other day should think twice, may be more than twice, before doing so. Before we look into “as often as,” let us look into the significance of “eating this bread, and drinking this cup.” Seeing the bread and the cup is not satisfying the requirement to remember the Lord’s death. One must eat the bread and drink the cup to make it a supper, the Lord’s Supper. Without eating and drinking and only by seeing those by looking at it will not make it a supper. It makes it only the food for the supper. The bread must be broken; otherwise it is not in memory of the death of the Lord. The bread and the cup must be taken separately; otherwise the death of the Lord is not remembered. If taken together, then we remember the Lord before his death. On the cross His blood was separated from His body. They were not united again. In His body He rose from the dead and ascended to the Father’s presence. His blood is still on this earth to wash us from all our sins. Why the first day of the week mandatory when the exhortation is “as often as,” in connection with the Lord’s Supper? What is the significance of the first day of the week as opposed to any other day of the week in observing the Lord’s Supper? The answer is simple. It is the only day given in the scriptures that the saints gathered together to eat the Lord’s Supper (Acts 20:7). Who are we to change the day that is accepted and

13

given to us in the word of God by the Holy Spirit as the day that the Lord’s Supper was practiced by apostles and the Christians? Do men have the authority to change the immutable and inspired word of God according to fancy of our desires and convenience? Our desires and convenience are not God’s commands. There are some who cannot see any difference between any of the days in a week to remember the Lord as He commanded. They only see a mere change of day, without any ramification, including changing what is established in the scriptures. The one and only day that is established in the scriptures is the first day of the week. Who are we to change what is established in the scriptures? In the scriptures, it is distinguished from ‘the seventh day,’ which is the Jewish Sabbath day. It was part of the old creation. ‘The first day’ of the week stands in contrast to it as the first day of the new creation. The seventh day was observed as the day of rest by a command written on stone, while the observation of Lord’s supper on the first day of the week from the power of His resurrection (Phil. 3:1-12). It was on the first day of the week He appeared to Mary in the garden and asked her to go and tell His disciples about His resurrection (John 20:1-18). It was on the first day of the week He appeared to the two disciples who were going to a village that was about 60 stadia (furlongs or approximately 1/8 of a mile) from Jerusalem and expounded from the OT about the prophecies (Luke 24:13-21J. To them He explained from Moses and from all the prophets. In John 20:19 we read, “When therefore it was evening on that day, which was the first [day], of the week, and the doors shut where the disciples were, through he fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and say to them, Peace [be] to you.” When this happened Thomas was not with the company of the disciples. The disciples were gathered together because of the fear of the Jews. Because of the fear of the Jews, the doors were shut. The doors, in plural, are indicative of the condition of their heart. Thomas was not with them. Therefore, he has to wait another eight days, the next first day of the week, to see the Lord (John 20:28). It was the Lord’s doing. It was He who decided to show himself on the first day of the week to His disciples who were in fear of the Jews. The disciples were commanded to wait in Jerusalem not departing from that city waiting for the promise of the Father, the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:4-8). When the Pentecost fully came, the Holy Spirit came upon them (Acts 2:1-4). The Lord remained in the grave till the Sabbath was fully past and it was the morning of the first day of the week that He rose from the dead. In like manner, the Holy Spirit remained in heaven, away from the disciples, until the Pentecost was fully come. It was the daytime and the Sun was shining. The Assembly was formed and united to its glorified head in Heaven, the glorified Lord Jesus Christ, on the morning of the first day of the week. This is figuratively given in Leviticus 23:11. There on the morrow after the Sabbath, the first day after the Sabbath, the priests waved the sheaf. It was the day of resurrection of our Lord from the dead. Then they were to count seven Sabbaths, and the day after the seventh Sabbath – that is the 50th day – two waveloaves were to be offered to the Lord. If we follow this timetable in our Lord’s life we will see a clear parallel. On the day of Passover our Lord Jesus Christ was offered as the Lamb without spot and wrinkle. On the day after the Sabbath He rose from the dead as the sheaf was waved. The day after the seven Sabbaths, the fiftieth day, - on the day of Pentecost – the Holy Spirit came down and formed the Assembly from the two groups of people, the Jews and Gentiles, and presented to God as the body of the risen Lord being its head, fully joined. The Assembly had no existence before the day of Pentecost. When the Holy Spirit came, He came to remain with the Assembly to lead its members into all truth. All members of the Assembly were baptized with the Holy Spirit at the same time without any exception. They did not have to wait any more for the Holy Spirit to come upon them, as some teach. It was on Pentecost the glad tidings of salvation was preached for the first time by the guidance of the Holy Spirit by those who were baptized by the Holy Spirit. It was on the first day of the week. That is the day the disciples became the living stones to be built into the Assembly as its first stones, Christ being the corner stone. That is the day a timid group of fishermen who were afraid of the Jews stood up and showed the world what is the power of God.

14

It was on a first day of the week the Assembly – the body and bride of Christ – was formed on this earth by the baptism with the Holy Spirit uniting it to the glorified head in Heaven, the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 2). It was the day to remember the Lord’s death and the preaching of the gospel. It was the day to remember the Lord’s death, because they were baptized on that day into the body of Christ with the Holy Spirit. It was the day to preach the gospel, because being filled with the Holy Spirit they preached the gospel to the multitude. It was the day the disciples gathered together to break bread in memory of the Lord Jesus Christ in Acts 20 and 1 Corinthians 11. This ‘as often as’ is not a maximum requirement, it is a minimum requirement. Those who make it a maximum requirement have changed the frequency of remembering the Lord to once a month, preferably on the first Sunday of the month. Others may do it once in two months, once in three months, or in special occasions. There are others who do that more than once a day as a sacrifice. It is not a sacrifice; it is in memory of the broken body and the blood of the new covenant we observe, at His command. From Acts 20:7; and 1 Corinthians 11:17-18; 16:2 we conclude that the Disciples of Christ (Christians) should come together at least once a week to break bread. That minimum frequency should be the first day of the week. The moral fitness of the first day is seen from our Lord’s appearing to the disciples on the first day of the week. This moral significance is magnified by the formation of the Assembly as the body of Christ in Acts 2 by the pouring and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The Lord and the Holy Spirit lead us away from the Jewish observances. We are not drinking the Passover cup, but the cup of the New Covenant. Our Lord said that He would taste the Passover cup again in the kingdom. We, the members of the Assembly, will eat the broken bread and the cup till He come to receive us to be with Him in the air. Not after that. The first day of the week is the day that the Father took His rejected stone by men and gave Him the glory to be the first-born from among the dead (1 Corinthians 15:20; col. 1:18; Rev. 1:5), in fulfillment of Psalms 118:22-24. “[The] stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner: This is of Jehovah; it is wonderful in our eyes. This is the day that Jehovah has made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.” In Acts 20:7, when the disciples gathered together on the first day of the week; it was not to hear Paul or to hear singing by others to others. It was to break bread. Paul’s message and exhortation were of secondary in nature. The disciples, Christians, should come together, these days, to break bread. Many Christian groups are gathering together now to hear a preacher and singing by others to others – choir singing. To them, remembering the Lord as He wishes is not at all important. In Revelation 1:10, Apostle John was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day. This is the only place we see this expression, the Lord’s Day, in the scriptures. It was the day that the Lord has made for the Lord’s people. Therefore, it is called the Lord’s Day. It was to remember the Lord’s death and the preaching of the gospel. The first day of the week implies that there is nothing that precedes it. On the first day of the Lord’s ministry on this earth He came to John to be baptized (John 1). It was for the fulfillment of all righteousness. He was declared by the Father as His only beloved Son in whom He was well pleased. The Holy Spirit descended upon Him in the form of a dove, while he was praying. The first day of the week is a public thing, but gathering together of the disciples is a private thing. Many partake of the first day, but only a few are gathered to see the risen Lord and say, “My Lord and my God.” Only a few are gathered together to remember Him as He commanded. We should never forget the fact that the Lord’s Supper was instituted in the Gospels, practiced in the Acts of the Apostles, and taught about its meaning in the epistles. “As often as” is a minimum requirement from the Lord in observing the Lord’s Supper as a memorial to Him The scripture makes it clear as the first-day of the week is that minimum requirement. It is not a maximum requirement as many consider and practice. If any two or three likes to break bread more often than on the first-day of the week, there is no scriptural prohibition to it. But there is an immutable scriptural precedence to do that on the first-day of the week and should not be changed by mortals.

15

Chapter IV

Is There a Difference Between “The Lord’s Table” And “The Lord’s Supper?” The Lord’s Table: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of the Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of the Christ? Because we being many, are one loaf, one body; for we all partake of that one loaf…But that what the nations sacrifice they sacrifice to demons, and not to God. Now I do not wish you to be in communion with demons. Ye cannot drink the Lord’s cup, and the cup of demons: ye cannot partake of the Lord’s table, and of the table of demons.” (1 Corinthians 10:16-21) Our Lord Jesus Christ sitting at the supper table, “in the same night in which He was betrayed,” instituted a new supper, replacing the old feast. It was a solemn moment in a memorable night. The purpose of this new supper was to “announce the death of the Lord, until he come.” From the moment of its institution till now, for over 2000 years, it still serves its purpose, though the enemy has tried his best to replace it or to reduce it to insignificance. To the saints, it is the most precious time on this earth to be gathered around His table to partake of the supper in His memory. Unfortunately, in KJV the Greek word καταγγελλετε (KATAGGELLETE, means ‘you declare,’ or ‘you announce’) as “ye do show.” It is not a showing of His death, but it is a declaration or an announcement of His death. In the scriptures we read about the Lord’s Table (1 Corinthians 10:21): Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:20), and Lord’s Day (Revelation 1:10). Do we remember the Lord’s death (1 Corinthians 11:26) by announcing it (before the Father, before the saints, and before the world) through the Lord’s Supper by partaking of the Lord’s Table on the Lord’s Day? For the purpose of studying the difference between, if any, the Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper, I wish to consider the former first. The Lord’s Table is mentioned in 1 Corinthians 10:21. There the expression is “Ye cannot partake of [the] Lord’s table, and of [the] table of demons.” We are told about the significance of partaking of the Lord’s Table and its appropriateness in relation to that of the demons. If we are asked about “partaking of the Lord’s table,” we usually think about the Lord’s Supper. What is the meaning of ‘partaker?’ The Greek word translated, as ‘partaker’ is µετεξω (METEXO), means “to hold with.” It is also translated as ‘pertain to,’ ‘take part of,’ and ‘use.’ In 1 Corinthians 10:21 we are told that we are taking part of the Lord’s Table. This taking part has a connotation of eating. Every one who is born of God should be a partaker of Lord’s Table and eating the broken bread and drinking the cup is its outward expression. In 1 Corinthians 10 we read about, “But concerning things sacrificed to idols.” In chapter 10 Paul mentions idolatry and the table of demons in contrast to eating of the ‘one bread’ and ‘one cup’ being partakers of the Lord’s Table. The Corinthian saints were told that they couldn’t be partakers of the Lord’s Table and the demon’s table at the same time. They were not to eat that which was offered to idols, if they knew that the food they eat was offered to idols. That is, knowingly they cannot eat that which was offered to idols. The term, “Lord’s Table” was known to the Jews. In Ezekiel 41:22 we read about the table that is before Jehovah. “The altar was of wood, three cubits high, and its length two cubits, and its corners, and its length, and its wall were of wood. And he said unto me, this is the table which is before Jehovah.” In Malachi 1:7 we read, “Ye offer polluted bread upon mine altar; and ye say, wherein have we polluted

16

thee? In that ye say, the table of Jehovah is contemptible.” The Jews who read the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament – usually designated as LXX, knew it as “the Lord’s Table.” In Malachi we read about the offering of the polluted bread upon the altar and the Lord’s Table is contemptible. In 1 Corinthians 10 we read the sacrifice to idols, which should be on its altar, is united with the demon’s table. How clever is the enemy to combine what was given in the Old Testament and pollute the divine truth? In the law it was required to eat of certain sacrifices by the offerer and this eating was to be in a holy place. But in Corinth the practice was to eat what was offered to the demons at the demon’s table. When Moses erected the tabernacle in the wilderness, there was a table with 12 breads representing the twelve tribes of Israel and it was called the ‘table of shew-bread.’ It was also before Jehovah and only the priests were allowed to eat the bread that was on that table. In 1 Corinthians 10:18 we read that Israel after the flesh were partakers of the altar. In 1 Corinthians 11:21, the saints are partakers of the table. At this juncture, we need to look into the Greek word used in connection with the Lord’s Table in 1 Corinthians 10. In KJV we read, “Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?” (1 Corinthians 10:18) The word translated as ‘partakers’ in this verse is κοινωνοι (κοινωνοι, means ‘one who shares’), should have translated as ‘sharers.’ The Greek word translated as ‘communion’ in 10:16 in connection with the bread and the cup is κοινωνια (KOINONIA), means the ‘act of using a thing in common.’ Therefore the correct translation of 1 Corinthians 10:18 should be, “See Israel according to flesh: are not they who eat the sacrifices in communion with the altar?” While in connection with the Lord’s Table, the word for ‘partaker’ is µετεξω (METEXO), means “to hold with.” This word is what appears in 10:17 and 21. This sharing is further explained in Luke 5:10, “And in like manner also on James and John, sons of Zebedee, which were partners (κοινωνια − KOINONIA) with Simon.” They were sharers of the fish caught. If we look into Luke 5:7, there the Greek word for ‘partakers’ is µετοξοιs (METEXOIS). Therefore, the intended meaning is not that they shared the fish in common, but they held with each other the privilege of fishing in the lake. Similarly, there is a distinction between being with communion (κοινωνια) with each other and being partaker (µετεξω) in the Lord’s Table. In the same sense, we are told that we are partakers of the heavenly calling (Heb. 3:1); we are made partakers of Christ (Heb. 3:14); we have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 6:4); we are made partakers of God’s chastisement (Heb. 12:8). In the light of all these verses, it is sharing of the one bread and one cup, while partaking of the Lord’s Table is what we read in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11. When we are considering ‘communion’ or ‘fellowship’ (κοινωνια), there are three different aspects to consider. First, we read, “God [is] faithful, by whom ye have been called into [the] fellowship (κοινωνιαν) of his son” (1 Corinthians 1:9). It is ‘fellowship of’ and not ‘fellowship with.’ The significance is that we share the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, with all the saints. Second, “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion (κοινωνια) of the blood of the Christ? The bread which we break, is it not [the] communion (κοινωνια − ΚΟΙΝΟΝΙΑ) of the body of the Christ?” (1 Corinthians 10:16) Here we are sharing the one bread and the one-cup in common. Third, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion (κοινωνια) of the Holy Spirit, [be] with you all,” (2 Corinthians 13:14), and as saints, we share the benefits of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit the same way as we share the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God. When we are studying about the Lord’s Table, we should consider the reason for placing the cup before the bread in 1 Corinthians 10:16. In the Lord’s Supper, it is the bread that is before the cup (1 Corinthians 11:2026). The order is reversed in these two places in the scriptures. In chapter 10, the prominent thought is not assembling in the Lord’s name. The prominent thought is our communion (κοινωνια) or fellowship with Christ. Therefore, the cup is first and is followed by the bread. When we drink wine from the cup, a believer identifies himself/herself with the death of Jesus Christ in all it values. It also brings to mind the love of God to man in giving His only begotten Son. All the purposes of grace are the result of this love. Before the floodgate of God’s love to man was to open, the question of sin must be settled. The shedding of the blood was the

17

requirement for the remission of sin. Christ mentioned it as the baptism to be baptized with. These are the reasons for mentioning the cup before the bread in 1 Corinthians 10:16. In the light of 1 Corinthians 11:17-26, we know that the assembling of the saints to remember the Lord’s death is on the first day of the week. But we are partakers of the Lord’s Table on each day of the week. The Lord’s Supper is on the first day of the week as expressed and fixed in Acts 20. The Lord’s Table remains with us throughout the week to remind us about our responsibility not to be partakers with the demon’s table. In the Lord’s Table we actively participate in all the treasures that are in the death of the Lord Jesus Christ before God. In the Lord’s Table we actively participate in all the treasures that are in the death of the Lord Jesus Christ before God. The Lord’s Supper is its active expression by breaking the bread and drinking the cup. In 1 Corinthians 10 we actively participate by breaking the bread ourselves. In chapter 11, it is the Lord who breaks the bread. There we read that it was He who took the bread, it was He who gave thanks, it was He who broke the bread, it was He who took the cup, and it was He who supped. When we eat the one broken bread and drink the one-cup, we are identifying with all the treasures that are seen by the Father in the death of His only begotten Son, our Lord. The bread and wine becomes part of our bodies. That which represents the body and blood of the Lord was placed in such a manner to become an integral part of our bodies. There were only one bread and one cup. They became part of the bodies of them who are placed on this earth as the body of the glorified Lord, Him being its head. After the day of Pentecost, the Assembly is the body of Christ on earth. Therefore, the corporate completeness of the Assembly, men in flesh who are elected according to His eternal council, is contemplated. In 1 Corinthians 10, our assembling together is not the subject of interest, though it is understood to have communion. It is not the principal thought. But when the Lord’s Supper is discussed in chapter 11, we read about ‘coming together‘ in verses 17, 18, 20, 33, and 34. In 1 Corinthians we read about the assembly coming together in three places. First, in chapter 5 the assembly came together to keep the holiness of God’s house. This was accomplished by putting away a wicked person. “Remove the wicked person from among you” is the instruction. To do this, they have to come together. This connotation is also seen in Matthew 18:15-20. Second, in chapter 11 we read about coming together in connection with the Lord’s Supper. Third, we read in chapter 16 we read, “On the first day of [the] week let each of you put by at home, laying up [in] whatever [degree] he may have prospered…” On the first day of the week they were to come together and that was to remember the Lord’s death in the Lord’s Supper. While they come together, they were instructed to collect money as each member was prospered during that week. The following verses also indicate that the coming together should be used for the edification of the saints. Let us consider this ‘coming together’ as detailed in 1 Corinthians 11. In 11:17 their coming together was for something better, but by their actions they made it for something worse. Their action was changing the Lord’s Supper to their own supper. In 11:18 we read that they came together in assembly to propagate divisions among them. They not only changed the Lord’s Supper to their own supper, they also used the assembling together to encourage group formation among them. What a change from the unity of the assembly in Christ that was before them during the week, as in chapter 10, to a meeting of many groups having their own supper. Their gatherings are not for the primary purpose of remembering the Lord’s death till He comes. Though they deviated from the truth of gathering, still practiced certain truths in gathering. When it is said, “when ye come together in assembly,” (11:18) it gives the character of assembling or coming together. What is the characteristic that they still maintained? This we read in verse 20. “When ye come therefore come together into one place” shows that they were to assemble in a certain place or locality. In verse 21 we read that the purpose of assembling in a locality was to eat a supper. Instead of the Lord’s Supper the Corinthians ate their own supper. They gathered together not to sing, hear some one preaching, hear some one teaching, or hear a thrilling gospel message. They did not come together to see the exercise of gifts, such as prophecy, speaking in tongues, healing, etc. They did not come together for scripture reading, ministry, or Sunday School. They came together

18

‘in assembly.’ When they assembled they came together as members of the body of Christ to eat a supper, their own supper, and not the Lord’s Supper. In 11:33, they were asked to “wait for one another,” when they are assembled to eat, to eat the Lord’s Supper. That is to say, the whole assembly is to be together in one place to remember the Lord’s death in the Lord’s Supper on the Lord’s Day is required in the scriptures. In 11:34 we are told not to come together for judgment. The coming together of the saints that was mentioned in 1 Corinthians 11 to eat the Lord’s Supper continues even to chapter 16. Chapter 10 tells us that the gathering is around the Lord’s Table and there we have communion with the one body of the Lord in the one bread and in the blood in the one-cup. In chapter 14 we read about the use of gifts of the Holy Spirit in such gathering. In 1 Corinthians 14:23-25 we read, “If therefore the whole assembly come together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and simple [persons] enter in, or unbelievers, will not they say ye are mad? But if all prophecy, and some unbeliever or simple [person] come in, he is convicted of all; the secrets of his heart are manifested; and thus, falling upon [his] face, he will do homage to God, reporting that God is in deed amongst you.” Our gathering together at the Lord’s Table must convict even an unbelieving believer about the leading of the Holy Spirit and he/she must come to the realizations that the secrets of his/her heart that are in error will be manifested to them. This realization will enable a true believer who did not believe about the leading of the Holy Spirit and the use of the gifts of the Holy Spirit to fall on his/her face and exclaim, “God is indeed among you.” This is the reason that we are told about the assembly in 1 Corinthians 14:33, “For God is not [a God] of disorder but of peace, as in all assemblies of the saints.” All assemblies consist only of the saints. The gathering of the saints around the Lord’s Table to eat the Lord’s Supper will glorify God by manifesting His presence among such gathering. Therefore, our gatherings are not to exalt ourselves and we should cease from doing so. The assembling of the saints are not a gathering of the saved and the unsaved. It is not a company of mixed multitude to show the desire of compromise and tolerance on what is given in the word of God. An unbeliever and/or an unsaved may come into the place of gathering when the saints are assembled around the Lord’s Table. If such happens, then our public utterances should make them to fall on their face saying, “God is indeed among you.” For this reason, Apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 14:15, “I will pray with the spirit, but I will pray also with the understanding; I will sing with the spirit, but I will sang also with the understanding.” There the two activities of prayer and singing are mentioned. In verse 19 we read about speaking in an assembly of saints, “But in [the] assembly I desire to speak five words with my understanding, that I may instruct others also.” A word of exhortation before the meeting is over is very appropriate and this is to instruct the saints. Then from verses 23 to 25 we read about speaking in tongues and prophesying. The speaking in tongues are signs to the unbelievers. From verse 16, we could conclude that this unbeliever could be a believer who does not believe in the leading of the Holy Spirit in us. To the unbelieving Jewish believers who went with Peter to the house of Cornelius, the speaking in tongues was manifested to make them believers that the Gentiles are members of the body of Christ with the same standing as the Jewish believers have. Seeing the Gentiles speaking in tongues as they did on the day of Pentecost, they believed in God taking out a people from the Gentiles the same manner as from among the Jews. When Paul met with the disciples of John the Baptist in Philippi, in order to silence the critics of Judaizers, the disciples of John spoke in tongues by Paul’s hands being laid on them. (There, Apostle Paul identified himself with those believers in Philippi by laying his hands on them while they were receiving the Holy Spirit. The laying of hands was not for receiving the Holy Spirit, but for him being identified with them.) Before the completion of the New Testament, this was the purpose of speaking in tongues – a sign for the unbelieving, as we read in the first epistle to the Corinthians. In all the incidents of the Holy Spirit enabling the believers to speak in tongues, Jewish believers were present. Those Jewish believers are to be made believers in the destruction of the middle wall of partition and bringing the sheep from the two fold and this was accomplished by enabling the new believers to speak in tongues as at the day of Pentecost. In 1 Corinthians, similar instruction is also given about prophesying. In verse 26 we are told, “Whenever ye come together, … Let all things be done to edification.” Our participation in the Lord’s Table must be for the edification of the saints. It can be accomplished only by the leading of the Holy Spirit.

19

The woman’s place in an assembly where the unbelieving believer will exclaim that “God is among you,” is given in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. “Let [your] women be silent in the assemblies, for it is not permitted to them to speak; but to be in subjection, as the law also says. But if they wish to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is a shame for a woman to speak in assembly.” This is not a group named by a name, such as: Pentecostals, Baptists, Presbyterians, etc. Here we are told about the coming together as saints around the Lord’s Table to eat the Lord’s Supper. No one on this planet we call earth or any creatures in the heaven or elsewhere have the authority to change the word of God. As far as the saints are concerned, Apostle Paul wrote, “If any one thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize the things that I write to you, that it is the Lord’s commandment.” The recent tendency among the people in the Christendom to ordain women as laudable by the Pentecostals and Charisma tics as the evidence of the correctness of their teaching and practices is against the commandment of the Lord. They who claim to have the Holy Spirit as a second blessing and speaking in tongues as their blessings from the Holy Spirit refuse to read, practice, and obey what the Holy Spirit inspired Apostle Paul to write as the Lord’s command in 1 Corinthians 14:34-37. Who are we to over-rule the Lord? The women’s place is given in the scriptures in various epistles. In the Gospels we read, “They ministered unto Him of their substance” (Luke 8:3). We also read about their service at the cross and at the sepulcher. We read about the role of Priscilla in Acts 18:2, 18, 26; Romans 16:3; and 1 Corinthians 16:19. She along with her husband Aquila, straightened ApolIos on the scriptures and this was done at home and not in the assembly of saints. Romans 16:1 we read that Phoebe was a minister of the assembly at Cenchrea. Here the meaning of ‘minister’ is that she is a ‘helper,’ as we read in the next verse, “For she also has been a helper of many, and of myself.” Changing the place of being a helper to that of a ‘shepherd’ is a direct violation and over-ruling of the Lord’s commandment. We are not to come together as we like or as we think fit. It must be in accordance with the Divine commandment. The Lord’s Table is not a place for mourners or those who have no part with the Lord (John 13:8). The bread we break is the communion of the body of Christ. It is the symbol of that body He took when He emptied Himself to take the form of a servant. It is the symbol of that body on which the Lamb of God carried our sins away, not to be seen any more. It is written that the cup we bless is “a cup of blessing.” It is a cup of thanksgiving. It is a divinely appointed symbol of the precious blood of the Lamb of God that takes away our sins. It is the symbol of that blood that procured redemption for us. These two are the symbols of the body and blood that became a ransom for us. We could not break the bread and drink this cup, which are symbols of His body and blood, with sad hearts and sorrowful countenance. If there was a time for being sorrowful at the celebration of this remembrance, it should have been at its first institution. Soon after the institution of this supper, our Lord said, “My heart is sorrowful even unto death” (Mat 26:38; Mark 14:34). But in instituting this feast, He gave thanks. From the four accounts of the institution of the Lord’s Supper, we learn that the Lord blessed (ειλογησαs = EILOGESAS), as well as gave thanks (ευχαριστησαs = EUCARISTESAS) for the bread and the cup. ‘Giving thanks’ shows the character of His utterance and the ‘blessing’ expresses the form in which it came forth from Him. The Lord gave thanks to God and blessed the results of His atoning death. He who knew the judgment of God gave thanks and blessed the death of the Lord for the remission of sin for the elect. It was a full and perfect act of Him who came to save us from the judgment of God. To our surprise we do not read the exact words of His blessing or giving thanks in the scriptures. Even we do not read how the Apostles or early Christians gave thanks for the bread and the cup. It was completely omitted by the wisdom that can be attributed only to God, the Holy Spirit who is sent from the Father to guide us into all truth. If it were given, there is a possibility that we would have made it a compulsory part of remembering the Lord’s death for the breaking of bread. By this omission, we are taught that there is no fixed form of reciting certain words in remembering the Lord’s death. Each time, at the Lord’s Table, we are depending on the guidance of the Holy Spirit to remember the Lord’s death by partaking of the Lord’s Supper. When He had joy in the breaking of the bread, which indicates that He was joyful in bruising His body and pouring forth His blood for us, you and me. When a believer realized this, he may have tears of joy and gratitude flowing down in worship, bowing before God in spirit and truth (John 4:23), and adoration of the one who gave Himself for him. Those

20

tears of joy and adoration should not be mistaken for tears of sorrow and mourning. Those who mistake it for tears of sorrow and mourning should reconsider their position and place before the One who instituted this beautiful Supper in His memory. To my alarm, there are those who say, “At the Lord’s Table many a time we find morose countenance projecting morbidity to languish the death of Jesus Christ…” or, “Sunday services are ‘like attending funeral service,’ and the participants as ‘zombie corps on the wooden pew.’” Recently, I read one making a statement that the breaking of bread meeting is similar to that of being in a police station. It only shows their mindset towards the Son of God who came to save us, the undeserving sinners, by the grace of God. We are not to sit down at the Lord’s Table to eat the Lord’s Supper with indifference and sorrowful hearts as we sit down to eat an ordinary supper. At the Lord’s Table our hearts are filled with the sweet assurance of the eternal salvation that we received by the Lord’s death. The finished work of Christ on the cross fills our hearts and minds with gratefulness and tears of joy and appreciation that are beyond words may flow over and fall at His feet. They are not from morose countenance of projected morbidity, or are not what is seen at a funeral parlor, or not being taken into custody and placed in jail at a police station, as some think. What is the purpose of our coming together or assembling into one place? Is it to say about our family, our children, our houses, etc? Or is it, as written in the word of God, to break bread? The Corinthians did not come together to break bread, but it was to eat their own bread. The expression should be, “come together to eat the Lord’s Supper.” Then it is to enter into all that is hidden in the Lord’s death. This is achieved only by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. For this purpose we assemble on the Lord’s Day, the first day of the week, at the Lord’s Table to eat the Lord’s Supper as the Lord instituted in the night in which He was delivered up. The Lord’s Supper: “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke [it], and said, This is my body, which [is] for you, this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink [it], in remembrance of me. For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). The food becomes a supper if and only if one eats it and it is the supper only to those who eat it. To the onlookers or observers, it will remain as food but not as supper. In the Gospels we read about the institution of the Lord’s Supper, but in the epistles we read about its doctrine. The Holy Spirit used Luke to report the historical account of how often and what day of the week Paul and the early Christians observed it. The same Spirit used Apostle Paul to explain its doctrine in 1 Corinthians 10-16 chapters. In these scriptures we read repeatedly about the Christians or the saints ‘coming together’ or ‘coming together in assembly.’ The Corinthians asked certain questions to Paul and he answered those questions in his epistle, 1 Corinthians1-9 chapters. Then he wrote about certain things they did not asked, but he does not want them to be ignorant of. This is what we read in chapter 10:1. Paul wanted the saints to know the teachings (doctrines) that are related to their Christian growth and the coming together in an assembly. Thus, they were introduced to the Lord’s Table, first. The importance of one bread and one cup is explained to them. The oneness or unity of the one body of Christ on earth in the one loaf that is broken at the Lord’s Table is in chapter 10. Then the contrast between the Lord’s Table and the demon’s table is given. After that, the headship of Christ in the Assembly along with the hierarchical structure of the Assembly is given in 11:1-16. It ends with a very pregnant statement that should be our answer to those who change what is written in 11:1-16. According to that, our answer should be that we have no custom to content against what is written in the word of God. This answer includes the Assembly, the body and bride of Christ. Starting at 11:17 we are given the purpose and nature of our assembling in one place. The order of the purpose is: To eat the Lord’s Supper, as Paul received the instruction from the Lord (11:17-34); spiritual manifestations among the saints (chapters 1214); the gospel, including the death and resurrection of our Lord and our hope to be with Him when he comes

21

in the air (chapter 15); and the collection for the saints on the first day of the week (chapter 16). In these chapters, 1 Corinthians 10-16, we read repeatedly about ‘coming together’ and in chapter 16 about the ‘first day of the week.’ From Acts 20, we know that that was the day the Christians gathered together to break bread. We should not separate this section, 1 Corinthians 10-16, and study it as independent subjects for discussion. They are part of one doctrine, and that deals with the gathering together of the saints on the first day of the week to break bread in remembrance of the death of the Lord, till He comes. In 1 Corinthians 10-16, the ‘coming together’ of the saints are mentioned or inferred to about five times. An inference of gathering together is in 10:17, “Because we, [being] many, are one loaf, one body; for we all partake of that one loaf.” The whole assembly together, as the body of Christ, is seen in this one loaf. In chapter 14 we are in the immediate presence of God as being directed by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit in the presence of God establishes an order. In 11:17-18 the coming together in the assembly is not for the good, because of what it was for. In 11:20 we read, “When ye come therefore together into one place, it is not to eat [the] Lord’s Supper.” Here, coming together is with a purpose of showing our affection and not a question of doctrine. The Corinthians claimed that they were coming together doctrinally to eat the Lord’s Supper, but justified eating their own supper. They were not showing the unity in Christ, but it was isolation and individuality that was manifested. They were eating, “his own supper.” It is in contrast with “The Lord’s Supper.” The Lord’s Supper requires the full recognition of the one body and one cup. The Lord’s Supper is taken from the Lord’s Table sitting around the risen and living Lord is not on narrow principles of sectarianism from a sectarian table, but it is the remembrance of the whole body and blood of the Lord. The table is spread on the divine principle. Partaking of the Lord’s Supper is not just eating the bread and drinking the cup. It is announcing the Lord’s death and our faith in the blessed hope of His return to take us to be with Him forever. This announcement is not just before the world, or among those who are gathered in one place for the purpose of remembering the Lord’s death, but it is an active proclamation before God who delights in hearing from the saved. In 11:33 we again read about coming together and eating. These verses in chapter 11 deals with the coming together to eat the Lord’s Supper. The next time we read about coming together is in 14:23, “For God is not [a God] of disorder but of peace, as in all the assemblies of the saints.” The ‘coming together’ is referenced in this connection in 14:26 also. Here we read about the ‘assemblies of the saints’ or ‘coming together of the saints’ in connection with the spiritual manifestations that follows the eating of the Lord’s Supper, as historically seen in Acts 20. There Paul spoke very late into the night after the breaking of the bread. The last of ‘coming together’ can be inferred from 16:2. There we read about the first day of the week. The Lord’s Table is associated with the death of the Lord in its accomplishment of putting to an end of what came upon man as members of Adam’s race. In this aspect, we should consider understanding the character of this ‘coming together.’ How does God see us, when we are gathered together? When this aspect is not considered or overlooked; we may see strife, groups, and contention, and so on among us. God sees there one body of the redeemed gathered together in a given locality to remember the broken body of His dear Son being given and His blood shed. What is more important? Is that our petty preferences or remembering the death of the Lord? All the saints in Corinth were to come together to break bread. They were told to leave their personal preferences of life style and being followers of certain people before they come to remember the Lord’s death till He come. All the saints in a given locality must come together to break bread in the unity of the Spirit to partake the one loaf and one cup. Gathering together in different building in the same locality or community is not according to the scriptures. Such an act is similar to what we read about the assembly at Laodicea in Revelation 3. It is a sad condition of saints to split the body of Christ limb by limb and then to gather each limb to break the bread in remembrance of the death of the Lord. Do we think that we can destroy the body of our Lord that came into existence on the Day of Pentecost by the baptism of the Holy Spirit joining the body to the glorified head, the risen and ascended Lord Jesus Christ, in heaven? When the saints decide to gather at different places in a given locality or community, they are taking apart that body of the Lord into pieces. We must change our behavior. Who is the greatest? The Lord or one of us?

22

In the Lord’s Supper, there is no reference to forgiveness of sins. There is no reference to fitting us to be eligible to come to His presence. No saint comes to God’s presence as sinners or as members of the fallen race of Adam. We come together as first-generation Christians, who are adopted into the family of God (Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:5) and being called as brethren by the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. We must individually come to the realization of this truth of us being sons of God, “For which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren” (Hebrews 2:11). This relationship and calling are not commutative in nature. We should not call Him our ‘brother’ as some do. He is our Lord and our God as Thomas said, when He saw the Lord in person after resurrection (John 20:28). There are no second-generation Christians in the Assembly that Christ builds. All are first-generation children of God. From John 15:13 we know that when we gather together to eat the Lord’s Supper, it is also as his friends. When God look at our gathering together to eat the Lord’s Supper, he sees a company of sons of God in Christ - His dear Son, a company of those who are called brethren by Christ, and a company of those who are called His friends by Christ. We are not gathered to compare each other, establish our desires and plans, or to content with each other; but it is to remember the Lord’s death till He comes. When we are coming together as His brethren, friends, and sons of God, the question of our fitness is not in question, but we are to examine ourselves about our position. Lack of this action is the root of our breaking bread at different places in a given locality. The local assembly is broken. How can one say that a broken body that is separated into parts is alive and consists of living stones (1 Peter 2)? The institution of the Lord’s Supper is seen in the Gospels. In the Gospel of John, we do not read about the bread and the cup. Of course In John’s Gospel we read about its meaning. This explanation and meaning is given in John 13-17. There we do not read about an account of the actual supper, but we read about what was took place in the upper room, on that night in which He was betrayed. In John 13 we read the emptying of the Son (Philippians 2) and cleansing the disciples. He asked the unbelieving Judas to leave the room before instituting the Lord’s Supper. Judas Iscariot had no part in the Lord’s Supper, on the night in which he betrayed the One in whose name he was called a disciple. What about us? Do we allow modern day Judas Iscariot to eat the Lord’s Supper? In 1 Corinthians 11 we read, “When ye come together in assembly, I hear there exist divisions among you,” and “For there must also be sects among you.” When a portion of the body of Christ disregards the Assembly principles, then there will be sects and divisions (heresies). The inspired Paul did not find this acceptable. It was similar to allowing Judas Iscariot to partake of the Lord’s Supper. At the Lord’s Supper, the existence of divisions, heresies, sects, etc. among the believers are not approved by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, we read, “I do not praise” you (1 Corinthians 11:17). Therefore, Paul added, “The approved may become manifest among you” (1 Corinthians 11:19). The “approved” stand in contrast to those who were insisting on doing their own will. The word translated “approved” in 11:19 is DOKIMOS (δοκιµοσ), which comes from the same root word that is, translated “examine himself” in 11:28, DOKIMAZW (δοκιµαζω). When we consider these two verses together, we understand that the one who approves himself eats the Lord’s Supper with those who are approved. This is quite different from the heretics, sects. A heretic is the one who insist on exercising his own will as opposed to God’s will. They are those who create division among the Christians. They despise the Assembly of God. To be approved one must be personally true to the Lord, one must be free of all schism, one must take his stand firmly and decidedly on the principle that embraces the unity of the body of Christ, the Assembly. In John 13-17 we read all the truth that the Lord Jesus Christ told His 11 disciples at the supper. In John 14 we read about what is “until He comes” as we read in 1 Corinthians 11:26. The disciples are told that they will be left on this earth under the care of a different Parakeet, comforter or advocate. Their fitness is not a question, because they were bathed all over. Christ washed only their feet. Let us read John 13:10-11, “He that is washed all over needs not to wash save his feet, but is wholly clean; and ye are clean, but not all. For he knew him that delivered him up: on account of this he said, ye are not all clean.” The one who was not clean was allowed to eat the Passover bread with Him. After that, Judas Iscariot was asked to leave. Judas Iscariot was so unclean that Satan entered into him, when he was asked to leave. He left immediately

23

(John 13:30) into the night from the light of this world. He never came back to the light, again. When he left, Jesus began to talk about His glorification and the meaning of the Lord’s Supper to those who were clean (John 13:31). The spiritual manifestations on 1 Corinthians 12-14 are given in John’s Gospel, because of the presence of the Parakeet that He will send from the Father. There he discussed about their declaration of His death before the world and to each other in John 15-16. Then our announcement of the Lord’s death before the Father’s presence is given in John 17. It is where we read that Jesus lifted up His eyes to heaven and spoke to the Father to glorify his Son. After this, in John 18:1 we read that our Lord Jesus Christ went out with His disciples beyond the torrent Cedron. This is what we read in the other Gospels as what happened after the institution of the Lord’s Supper. While the first three Gospels are silent about the details regarding the conversation Christ had with His disciples, the one who leaned on His breast provided it to us. Thus the Lord’s Supper is detailed in John’s Gospel. Therefore, it is not our fitness that should be before us, but we should come together with overflowing praise, worship, and thanksgiving. We must be seeing only His glory and beauty. We should be thinking only of His love and His promise. In the Gospels we read that the Lord in the presence of the 11 apostles instituted the Lord’s Supper. They also received the meaning of the Lord’s Supper from the Lord at the same time. In 1 Corinthians 11:23 we read, “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you.” There are only twelve men who received the truth of the Lord’s Supper from the Lord himself. We received this truth from them. John, one of the original eleven, gave what transpired on that night in which He was betrayed in the upper room. Apostle Paul gave the doctrine as he received it from the Lord, at a time unknown to us. One report is from the apostle to the Jews, while the other one is from the apostle to the Nations, Gentiles. Why the Spirit makes such a distinction. By providing the doctrine by the two apostles, the Holy Spirit shut the mouth of the Jews to connect the Lord’s Supper with Passover. Passover was a supper of the Jews only. The Holy Spirit also shut the mouth of the critics from the Gentiles to claim that the Lord’s Supper is another form of the Jewish supper of Passover, by providing the doctrine through the apostle to the Gentiles. The Lord’s Supper belongs to both the Jews and the Gentiles as a distinct and direct message to believers from both, having the middle wall of partition was broken down (Ephesians 2:14). In the New Testament we read about four truths that are revealed to Paul. They are: first, The Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:23-26); second, the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:3); third, the mystery of Christ and the assembly (Ephesians 3:3); and fourth, the rapture (1 Thessalonians 4). We read about all these four in 1 Corinthians. The third, about the mystery of Christ and the assembly is seen in 1 Corinthians 11:1-16. The fourth, the rapture is seen in 1 Corinthians 15. All these four truths that are revealed to Paul by the Lord Jesus are in connection with the Lord’s Supper. This revelation was by the Lord Jesus as the risen, glorified, and exalted Lord in the highest place in glory. The Lord Jesus Christ (not Jesus) took the bread, He took the cup, he blessed it, He broke the bread, and He said to share it among the disciples. He gave thanks for the bread and the cup. It was a time of praise to the Father. It became a feast of thanksgiving. For us, the Lord’s Supper is a great family feast for all His children gathered in one place. It is a time of happiness and joy. We come together in love and it is His love that brings us together. It may be true that each individual may have his/her own sorrows and disappointments in life. That is not the object of our remembrance. It is the Lord’s death that is the object of our remembrance. When our feeble eyes are filled with the Lord’s death, there is no room for personal anguish. Our sins are not the object of our remembrance; our Lord is the object. We do not read that the Lord ate that broken bread or the cup that are parts of the Lord’s Supper. He did eat the bread and drink the cup of the Passover. Not the bread and the cup of the Lord’s Supper. The Lord Jesus Christ established the Lord’s Supper on the night in which the wickedness of man reached its zenith. Judas betrayed his Master, Peter denied his Lord, His disciples ran away thinking of their safety, the priests and the scribes threw away their inhibition to show their hatred, the soldiers delighted themselves in mocking the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, Pilate claiming righteousness gave Him up in whom no fault was found to be crucified, the power and might of Satan lead the Jews and the Gentiles to crucify the Lord of glory. It was the hour and the power of

24

darkness. In that night the Lord declared the beauty and power of God’s love in grace towards us. He said “this is my body, which is for you,” and “This cup is the new covenant in my blood,” indicative of the truth that He has freed us from the ‘man of sin’ and from all the shame that he had planned for us. He does not look on us as fallen, but sees us as His brethren, friends, and sons of God. When we say that we are gathered around the Lord’s Table, what we actually mean is that we are gathered around Him who died for us. Around whose body was broken and whose blood was shed for our redemption. The bread is the memorial of that body which was broken for us, and the wine is the memorial of a life that was poured out for our sins. He is raised from the dead as the first fruit from among the dead. He is the living Lord who is glorified and exalted above all creation. He is seated at the right hand of God. He dies no more. His body will not be broken any more. His blood will not be shed any more. His work is finished, according to the eternal counsel of God. The scriptures do not allow the eating of the bread and drinking of the cup ‘unworthily’ (1 Corinthians 11:27) at the Lord’s Supper. This word, “unworthily” is with respect to the manner in which it was done, compared to the condition of the person who is doing it. The Christians at Corinth were called: saints, the Assembly of God, and sanctified in Christ. Such a group of Christians were exhorted to eat the Lord’s Supper in remembrance of the Lord’s death in a worthy manner. All those who were at the Lord’s Table to eat the Lord’s Supper were true Christians. There was no question about their faith or fitness before God. We are His children and our fitness is derived from that fact. My children are not to judge themselves about them being my children. They don’t have to make any judgment on this fact. But I expect them to judge themselves as to their habits and ways of life. This they do by self-judgment. About the fitness of the Corinthian believers no question was raised in this epistle. The manner in which they observed the Lord’s death was questioned. The individual persons were worthy, but the manner was not. As saints they were asked to judge themselves as to their behavior in life. Otherwise, the Lord will judge them in their persons. It was evident in some cases at Corinth. They were told to wash their feet when they come to eat the Lord’s Supper at the Lord’s Table. When the son who sold his inheritance and spent it away in a foreign land came back seeking his father’s mercy, he was given the best garments, sandals to his feet, and ring on his finger, before the feast was served. He came to the father in a beggarly condition. He ate at the father’s table as a son, not even as a servant. He was to judge himself as a son and not as a prodigal. It was the manner in which he ate was to be judged and not the fitness in which he was received by the father. The fitness came from the father; the manner of eating came from the son. That is the reason why the first-born was still outside the house, not partaking the supper prepared by the father. The first son considered that his fitness to eat at the father’s table came from him and not from his father. Therefore, when we eat the Lord’s Supper, what is manifested is not a doctrine, not a duty, but it is an exercise of our affection. It is the Lord who puts the bread and the cup in our hands to be shared among ourselves. In the bread, the Lord’s love comes before us. In the cup, our hearts are directed to the love of God. This is very similar to what we are told in Romans 5:5, “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit.” What is the significance of the Lord’s Supper? It is a feast of remembrance. It is a declaration of the Lord’s death. It is a declaration of His coming to receive us to be with Him forever. It is an expression of fellowship of all members of His body, the Assembly. Will it suffice to sit at the seat of the simple, unlearned, or the unbelieving and observing others taking part in the observance of the Lord’s Supper? Will it suffice one to eat the bread and not drink the cup? Will it suffice one to dip the break in the cup and eat them together? The one who merely observes do not eat the supper. The Lord’s command was to eat and drink the cup. Therefore, observing (watching or looking at) the Lord’s Supper being shared by others is not obeying the command of Christ to remember Him. In order it to be a supper the food must be eaten. To an observer, it remains as food and not as being participated it as supper. If one takes only the bread and not the cup, then he has not remembered the blood that was shed. If one takes only the cup and not the bread, then he remembers only the blood and not the body of Christ that was broken for

25

him. If one eats the bread after dipping it in the cup, he is taking the bread and the wine together. Thus, he is not separating the body from the blood. That is to say, he is not remembering the death of the Lord. He is remembering the Lord before His death and not after it. The Lord’s death is to be remembered by the saved as the only means by which they were brought into the privileged position of being the children of God. All these variations that are not found in the scriptures are just sacraments of non-accomplishment of redemption and the direct result of materialistic approach to God. We are expected to remember the Lord Jesus Christ in His death, before His resurrection, as united to Him after His resurrection, before His coming. This is not what some consider when they find this partaking of the Lord’s Supper as “morose countenance projecting morbidity” or “like attending funeral service,” or the participants being “zombie corps on the wooden pew,” or being in a police station. Also, beware of those who introduce a living Christ to animate the dead one (eating the bread and the wine together), if I may use this expression, destroy Him who died to save the sinners.

26

Chapter V

“This Cup Is the New Covenant in My Blood” “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not [the] communion of the blood of the Christ? The bread which we break, is it not [the] communion of the body of the Christ? Because we [being] many, are one loaf, one body; for we all partake of that one loaf… Ye cannot drink [the] Lord’s cup, and [the] cup of demons: ye cannot partake of [the] Lord’s table, and of [the] table of demons.” (1 Corinthians 10:16-17, 21) “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke [it], and said, This is my body, which [is] for you, this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink [it], in remembrance of me. For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). Here we are introduced to a new covenant and it is connected to the cup that symbolizes the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ that was shed for the remission of our sins. It is the blood that is still on this earth. He rose only in the body that was buried in the tomb, but the blood was shed on the cross and was on the ground. Thus this new covenant is on this earth between God and man by the mediator that was appointed by God. Let us briefly try to understand the importance of “the new covenant in my blood.” Even in the libraries of ancient Babylon, there were bricks – the form of early books, there are references to Jehovah as the covenant making God. These bricks were from an earlier date than Abraham. Among the ancient people, there were three types of covenants, namely: the shoe covenant, the salt covenant, and the blood covenant. In Hebrew, the word for ‘covenant’ is B’RIT pronounced BERITH, meaning ‘covenant,’ ‘league,’ or ‘confederacy.’ The New Testament equivalent in Greek is DIATHEKE (διαθηκη), which means, ‘covenant,’ or ‘arrangement.’ The Shoe Covenant: When two people made an agreement the shoe covenant was the lowest ranking form. To walk in the desert the shoes were indispensable. When two men are walking together they may want to make a covenant between them. Each will draw one of their shoes and exchange it to the other. While making this exchange they will recite the terms of the covenant. The exchanged shoes are the sign of the covenant. Now they will walk with one of their own shoe on one foot and the exchanged shoe on the other. This will remind them of their covenant and compel them to keep the terms of the agreement that was made. The only way to break the covenant was to return the shoe to its original owner. By doing so, the covenant is broken and they are no more bound by it, because they returned the sign of the covenant. In Deuteronomy 25 we read about the shoe covenant in connection with raising children for a brother who died with out children. There the man who refuses to raise children for his dead brother is, “and his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe drawn off” (Deut. 25:10). In Ruth 4:7-8 we read, “Now this [was the custom] in former time in Israel concerning exchange, to confirm the whole matter: a man drew his sandal, and gave it to his neighbor, and this was the mode of attestation in Israel. And he that had the right of redemption said to Boaz, Buy for thyself; and he drew off his sandal.” When it came to Israel, the requirement was the kinsman redeemer to draw off his sandal from his feet before the elders and give it up as a sign of refusing to obey the covenant that Israel made with God at Sinai. In Ruth we read that when the kinsman redeemer who had the right to redeem drew his sandal Boaz accepted it to fulfill the requirements of

27

a kinsman redeemer, as he was next in line. When the Jews that were sent by the priests and Levites asked John about the reason of baptizing, his answer was, “I baptize with water. In the midst of you stands, whom ye do not know, he who comes after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to unloose” (John 1:26-27). We read about this in Matthew 3:11, Mark 1:7, Luke 3:16, and Acts 13:25 also. John implied to the Jews that there is a kinsman redeemer and he (John) is not the one to stoop down to unloose His sandal. That is, the real kinsman redeemer will fulfill his duty and requirement and John is not that one. The real kinsman redeemer was standing among them. In Psalms 60:8 and 108:9 we read, “…upon Edom will I cast my sandal…” If we read these Psalms carefully, then we could see that this casting of sandal on Edom was a symbol of being cast off by God. The Salt Covenant: This covenant was a little higher in status than the shoe covenant. In ancient time, they realized that during traveling in the desert through perspiration they loose salt along with water. Therefore, they used to carry a pouch of salt to mix with water before drinking. When two are traveling in the desert and they decided to make a covenant, they could make a decision to make a salt covenant instead of a shoe covenant. To do a salt covenant, each will open his pouch containing salt and take a pinch of salt and place it in the other’s pouch, while reciting the terms of the covenant. As a sign of agreement, both of them will shake his pouch to mix it well, while continuing their recital of terms of the covenant. Returning the same grains of salt to his friend can break this covenant. Returning the same quantity or amount is not acceptable to break the coven ant. It must be the same grains that were exchanged while making the covenant. Now, you can understand the difficulty to break a salt covenant. It was possible to break a salt covenant but not probable. That is, the probability of breaking a salt covenant was practically zero. The one who breaks with out returning the same grains of salt was to be put to death. In Leviticus 2:13 23 read, “And every offering of thine oblation shalt thou season with salt; neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy God to be lacking from thine oblation: with all thine offerings thou shalt offer salt.” Thus all the offerings of the children of Israel were indications of a salt covenant that is practically impossible for man to break, because it was man who placed the salt on the offering. This is referred to in Mark 9:49, “… and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.” In Numbers 18:19 we read about heave-offering, “And the heave-offerings of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer to Jehovah, have I given thee, and to thy sons and to thy daughters with thee, by an everlasting statute: it shall be an everlasting covenant of salt before Jehovah unto thee and thy sons with thee.” About the kingdom of Israel we read in 2 Chronicles 13:5, “Ought ye not know that Jehovah the God of Israel gave the kingdom over Israel to David for ever, to him and to his sons [by] a covenant of salt?” The sacrifices and the throne of David were confirmed by a salt covenant by God to Israel, implying that God is the only one who is capable of breaking it. In the vision of Ezekiel about the future kingdom of the Messiah we read in Ezekiel 43:43:24 about sacrifices, “And thou shalt present them before Jehovah; and the priests shall cast salt upon them and they shall offer them up for a burnt-offering unto Jehovah.” The Blood Covenant: The blood covenant was the highest-ranking covenants of all. It was rooted in the belief that the life is in the blood. When two people want to make a blood covenant they will take an animal or a bird and split it in the middle. Then they will place each part apart with a space between them with the spilt blood in that space. Then they will hold their hands together and walk between the two body parts on the space with blood reciting the covenant. Once the covenant is made, it can never be broken, because none of the participants of the covenant can bring the dead animal or bird back to life. In Genesis 15 we read about the blood covenant that God made with Abraham. There Abraham was to bring heifer of three years old, a shegoat of three years old, a ram of three years old, a turtle dove, and a young pigeon. Abraham killed them but did not split the birds, but he split the animals in the middle. When Jehovah made the covenant, Abraham was sleeping and God alone walk between the split bodies of the creatures. Jehovah, the merciful God, did not demand Abraham to walk between the split bodies, He alone walked. Since Abraham did not walk, his children were not to be punished by death, when they broke his covenant. God, who will not lie, will keep the covenant

28

He made with Abraham. Jehovah alone walked and made the covenant with Abraham. A sign of the covenant was given to Abraham and it was circumcision (Genesis 17) of all male born in his house on the eight day after their birth. The one who was not circumcised was to be killed, because he has no part in the covenant. In the New Testament we read that the cup we drink is the sign of the new covenant. “And having taken the cup and given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it. For this is my blood, that of the new covenant, that shed for many for remission of sins.” (Matthew 26:27-28) “And having taken the cup, when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drink out of it. And he said to them, This is my blood, that of the new covenant, that shed for many.” (Mark 14:23-24) “In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.” (Luke 22:20) “In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me.” (1 Corinthians 11:25) This new covenant is a blood covenant made between God and man, by the man Christ Jesus. The cup we drink represents the blood of the new covenant, compared to the blood that was repeatedly shed by the male children of the children of Abraham in connection with the old covenant. The Cup of the New Covenant: Having looked briefly into the three types of covenants, let us look into the ‘New covenant’ and the cup that represents that covenant. Our Lord Jesus Christ introduced us to the new covenant in relation to the cup. The bread was in relation to His body that was broken for us. Therefore, there is certain importance attached to the truth regarding the new covenant and the cup that represents it. In 1 Corinthians 10:16, this cup we drink is called “the cup of blessing.” Thus, there are two aspects connected to this cup. First, the new covenant and its blessings as we read from 1 Corinthians 10-16. Up to chapter 10, Paul answered the questions that were placed before him by the saints at Corinth. In chapter 10, Paul wrote to them about what the Corinthians should not be ignorant off. Then he goes on to discuss about the doctrine of gathering together of the saints to which the Corinthians should not be ignorant off. It started with the distinction between the Lord’s Table and the table of the demons. We live among those who do not consider, generally speaking, the gathering around the Lord’s Table is an essential activity of believers. To them the purpose of the gathering of the saints is for hymn singing and preaching and their ‘ministries’ are built around these two. To Paul, the gathering around the Lord’s Table was of supreme importance. After the distinction between the Lord’s Table and the table of demons was given, in chapter 11 we read about the headship. This portion starts with, “Be my imitators, even as I also [am] of Christ.” This exhortation along with the headship comes between the Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper. Those who make light of the Lord’s Table and Lord’s Supper also make light of the headship. This they demonstrate by allowing the women not to cover their head at their gatherings. Thus, they show to the world that they do not accept the headship of Christ to His body, the Assembly – the body and bride of Christ. They willfully ignore the obedience that comes from accepting the headship as explained in chapter 11. It is something that we should not be ignorant off. Not only that, it is the specific thing we have to do as an imitator of Paul as he is of Christ (11:1). After this we read about the Lord’s Supper. Those who take light of the Lord’s Table do not consider that it is necessary to remember the death of the Lord till He come as the important activity of their gathering. Those who take light of the Lord’s Table also place the eating of the Lord’s Supper of low priority. After the Lord’s Supper, Paul taught us about the necessity to judge ourselves and goes on to explain about the spiritual gifts as applicable to the gathering, in chapter 12. Many of those who take light of Lord’s Table and Lord’s Supper also misinterpret the teachings of spiritual gifts. In chapter 13, Paul goes on to explain about the spiritual gifts that will cease to exist or be removed from the Assembly. Those that were removed or ceased to exist were given because of the partial knowledge of the believers about the operation of the local assembly. They deny what the Holy Spirit taught through Paul. When that was completed and the knowledge was no more partial but full, The Lord made it known through Apostle John about the seriousness of adding or taking away of what is completed. Those who teach the misinterpretations concerning the spiritual gifts insist that those gifts that ceased or done away with are still in use. After that in chapter 14 we read about the misuse of the spiritual gifts by the believers at Corinth

29

and their insistence that such misuses are what should be practiced. The Corinthians did it in their ignorance (10:1), but those who conveniently and selectively pass over the verses that caution them about such misuses have no excuse. Practicing the gifts of the Holy Spirit in the gathering of the saints for personal prominence was the error of the Corinthians. After correcting this misuse of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, Paul went on to teach them about preaching of the Gospel to unbelievers. This gospel included the death and resurrection of the Lord, His victory over the enemy, the believer’s baptism unto Him, and our resurrection at His coming in the air, etc. Nowhere in the New Testament had we read that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are the main content of the Gospel. Many among those who take light of the Lord’s Table also change the content of the Gospel. To them the spiritual gifts has become the major part of their gospel. Then in chapter 16, we read about collection of money for helping the saints who are in need. It was to be done the first day of the week (16:2) that is the day of the Lord’s Supper. What we read in chapters 10-16 are connected with the Lord’s Table and Lord’s Supper. That is where we remember the broken body of our Lord in breaking the bread, and drinking the cup of the new covenant. It is done in Him memory. Second, in 2 Corinthians 3:6 we read about the new covenant of the spirit, as opposed to that of the letters. “Who also made us competent, [as] ministers of [the] new covenant; not of letters, but of spirit?” It is natural that we may get confused this new covenant with that we read in Jeremiah 31:31-34, “Behold, days come, says Jehovah, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant I made with their fathers, in the day of my taking them by the hand, to lead them out of the land of Egypt, which my covenant they broke, although I was a husband unto them, says Jehovah. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel, after those days, says Jehovah: I will put my law in their inward parts, and will write it in their heart; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know Jehovah; for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, says Jehovah: for I will pardon their iniquity, and their sins I remember no more.” In Jeremiah, Jehovah makes the new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The Assembly, the body and bride of Christ, consists of Gentiles is neither Israel nor Judah. Then, why is the cup mentioned as the cup of the new covenant? The answer comes from 2 Corinthians 3:6. This cup we partake in the Lord’s Supper is the cup of the new covenant of the spirit. It tells us of the spirit of God’s mind and His principles of dealing with Israel and Judah when they are restored under the new covenant, as stated in Jeremiah. God applies the principles and the spirit now to us. It is also the cup of blessing. That is, all the blessings that will come to Israel and Judah under the new covenant in Jeremiah are to be known in a spiritual sense in us, now. In a way, this is referred to in 2 Corinthians 3:3. This similarity is parallel to the pouring of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2 with that of Joel on the children of Israel and Judah in the millennial kingdom. We are told that we receive the blessings of the new covenant at the present age, now, in the spirit of it and not in the letter. In 2 Corinthians 3:6 we read, “For letter kills, but the Spirit quickens.” To understand the significance of this, we must go to verse 17. If we overlook the fact that 2 Corinthians 3:7-16 is a parenthesis and the continuation of verse 6 is in verse 16, then this whole chapter will be hard to understand. In verse 17 we read, “Now the Lord is the Spirit.” When we realize that statement from verse 17, we come to understand that the Lord (κυριωs KURIOS) is the Spirit of the new covenant. The scriptural statement is that it is the Lord, not as Jesus or Christ. It is as Lord who is risen, ascended and exalted to the highest place in glory. As the Lord, He administers all the blessings of the new covenant. As the Lord, He is the Spirit of the new covenant. The word ‘cup’ speaks not of the vessel, but of its content. The content is the wine that came as the result of bruising the grape, the fruit of the vine. Both the bread and the cup contain bruised grain and the juice of the crushed grape. The bruising is common to both and speaks about the divine judgment borne by the one whom we remember. There is a significant difference between the bread and the cup we partake. The bread contains that which was actually crushed and bruised, but in the cup we have the result of the crushing and bruising. In partaking the bread we eat the bruised grain, but in the cup we do not drink the bruised grape. The

30

fruit of the vine has to be bruised first to get the content of the cup. In the cup we have the resulting juice to drink. The bread speaks to us about the actual judgment that our Lord born for us. The cup speaks about what flows forth unhindered as the result of that judgment. In Matthew 26:27 we read, “And having taken the cup and given thanks, he gave it to them saying, Drink ye all of it.” That is, each and every one who is His disciple must drink of the result of the bruising of the grape. There is no excuse for not partaking in the Lord’s Supper. The bread precedes the cup to show the death of the Lord as the bruising of His body. The cup follows the bread to remind us that we are brought into a new covenantal relationship as the result of the bruising of His body. Our Lord was bruised first and died afterwards. “He was bruised for our iniquity” (Is. 53:5). “He was taken from oppression and from judgment” (Is. 53:8). In Hebrews 9:27 we read about man’s condition as, “It is the portion of man once to die, and after this judgment.” Our Lord did not die as a regular man. He died as the Lamb of God, a sinless and perfect man. In our Lord’s case the judgment preceded His death. The righteous judgment of God was the cup He drank. When He completely drank of the cup, He uttered the victor’s cry of triumph, “It is finished.” Then He laid his head on his chest and committed His spirit to the Father’s hand and expired. The judgment was first, and then the death. The death was the result of the judgment; it was not a natural death. If it was a natural death, then the judgment should follow. On Calvary, the death followed the judgment of God on the Holy and Innocent One of God. As our substitute, He was judged first and then He died as its result. Those who are redeemed of the blood of the Lamb are not to be judged again. This is the beauty of the eternal salvation. This is the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. Therefore, we are asked to partake the bread first and then the cup. Those who take them together are not remembering the death of the Lord, but they are remembering the Lord before His death, as He walked on this earth. If the blood is in the body, then it is not separated from the body or it is not shed. Then there is no redemption (Heb. 9:12). The power of redemption is the shed blood of the Lamb of God, and not the blood in the body. Those who see the bread and the cup do not partake on His judgment and death. When we partake them separately, after giving thanks to them separately, we are remembering the one who was judged for our iniquity and died as the result of that judgment. What are the terms of the new covenant? How do they apply to us? Do we enjoy at present what belongs to Israel and Judah in the future? The new covenant is made “not according to the covenant which I made to fathers” (Jeremiah 31:32). This is repeated in Hebrews 8:9. The first or the old covenant with the fathers depended on what they were to do. This new covenant is not conditioned upon what is to be done by the people. In the old covenant, it is repeatedly said “thou shall,” but the new covenant repeatedly states, “I will.” The old covenant is all from man’s side, while the new covenant is all from God’s side. In the epistle to Titus, we read in chapter 3:4-5, “But when the kindness and love to man of our Savior God appeared, not on the principle of works which have been done in righteousness which we had done, but according to His own mercy he saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.” From Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8 we learn that this new covenant has three distinct aspects. First, it provides a new nature by new birth, “I will put my law in their inward parts, and will write in their hearts.” Second, they will know Jehovah in themselves, “For they shall all know me.” In Hebrews 8:11 tells us that its meaning is, “All shall know me in themselves.” It is a conscious knowledge. Third, the knowledge of God is revealed in grace. “For I will pardon their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.” The terms of the new covenant are: the law is in their hearts, they know God as “God is love,” and they are no more conscience of sin. These are the blessings of the new covenant that awaits Israel and Judah, but they are ours today by the Spirit. Therefore, the cup of blessing contains the blood of the covenant in spirit. The unity of the body of Christ is a divine principle and doctrine. It demands separation of the body from every thing that belongs to the Devil and his demons. Unity of the body is not an excuse to tolerate that that belongs to the Devil or demons. This is brought to our attention in 1 Corinthians 10 in contrasting the Jewish practice of sacrifices of communion with the altar with the Gentile practice of eating the sacrifices to demons. The cup of the Lord is contrasted with that of the demons, and Lord’s Table is contrasted with that of the

31

demons. Partaking both is to provoke the Lord to jealousy. The individual members of the body of Christ, each Christian, is asked not to give an occasion to stumbling to Jews, Greeks, or the Assembly of God (1 Corinthians 10:32). Idolatry is all attendance and service rendered to every idol. Idolatry is not practiced under that name, but called in that function. People who are called by His name, “Christians,” by God should not practice it. The Corinthian Christians along with “those sanctified in Christ Jesus” (1 Corinthians 1:2) are reminded that being the members of the body of Christ we are to keep away from idols and those that belongs to demons. We must beware of the ecclesiastical attempts at the same purpose of demarcation of scriptural boundaries for the purpose of uniting with the world against the unity of the body of Christ. A word about the nature of the wine we drink at the Lord’s Supper may be appropriate. There are Christians who insist on using only freshly squeezed grape juice at the Lord’s Supper. Is there a scriptural warrant for such a teaching and its insistence? In Greek, οινοs (oinos) means wine and those who favor nonfermented grape juice insist that it means fresh grape juice. Let us look into the Old Testament about wine before looking into the New Testament. The most frequently used word for ‘wine’ in OT is YAYIN, which means, “What is pressed out,” and is used in connection with grapes. Therefore, the proponents of unfermented grape juice claim that it is just grape juice. If that is so, how did Noah got drunk by drinking YAYIN in Genesis 9:21-24? How did Lot’s daughters do what they did in Genesis 19:32-34? Why Aaron and his sons were asked to drink no wine or strong drinks, when they go into the tent of meeting (Lev. 10:9)? Why did Eli ask Hannah, “How long wilt thou be drunken?” (1 Samuel 1:14)? Why did Hannah answer, “I have drunk neither wine nor strong drink” (1 Samuel 1:15)? Was the royal wine in Esther 1:7 freshly squeezed grape juices? How the grape juice did made the heart of the king merry in Esther 1:10? Why Joel 1:5 addresses the drunkards and asks them to weep and howl? Why a girl was sold for wine in Joel 3:3? I could continue this manner of questions. For the sake of brevity, let me stop here from OT with a statement that in all these places we read YAYIN and its effect was getting drunk. How can this YAYIN be just grape juice that is not fermented? When Aaron and his sons were to go into the tent of meeting, they were not to drink wine (YAYIN in Hebrew) or strong drink (SHEKAR in Hebrew). Thus the wine is differentiated from strong drinks. In Leviticus 23:13 wine is required to be brought before Jehovah as the drink offering. If we consider fermentation as the effect of the action of yeast in the leavening process, why did God ask the children of Israel to offer a leavened object as a drink offering? This question is significant, in the light that our Lord repeatedly warned His disciples about “leaven of the Pharisees.’ He also told about the leaven being placed in to the lump by a woman. “By a woman” is significant and we should not leave it out. In all references, leaven is mentioned as evil that is not acceptable to God. But He required wine to be brought in as a drink offering! The reason is: when a little leaven is placed in a lump, that leaven came from outside the lump as a willful act of man and it was placed where the leaven was not before. A woman placed it in the lump from outside. It leavened the whole lump. It was a process of man to make the food more palatable than it will be. God considers any attempt by man to change the doctrines to make it more palatable to man is not acceptable to Him. God desires the absence of the leaven, strange doctrines that man has a tendency to add to His revealed word should not happen. When Saul did this, he was told, “Behold, obedience is better than sacrifices, attention than the fat of the rams” (1 Samuel 15:22). Man thinks that what is pleasing to man is what pleases God. That is not true. We have a lesson to learn from wine making. In the process of making wine, they do not add leaven (yeast) into the grape juice. The yeast comes with the grape as it grows in the vine and is in the grape juice. (Louis Pasteur discovered this when he was working for a distiller.) God places it on the grapes for human consumption and by God’s plan it is fermented. What God placed is to be brought to Him in gratitude. Therefore, the children of Israel were required to bring wine into the presence of God as a drink offering. On the contrary, no strong drinks (where man placed yeast to make the drink) were to be brought into the presence of God. Now let us look into the New Testament: The Greek word for wine is οινοs (OINOS). There is difference between new wine and old wine as mentioned in Matthew 9:17, Mark 2:22, and Luke 5:37-38. Did they give

32

Lord Jesus Christ unfermented grape juice when he was on the cross (Mark 15:23)? How can one make people get drunk by giving good grape juice (wine = οινον - OINON) first and then when they are drunk to give inferior one? Why the bridegroom violated this well accepted social behavior and provided the best of the best wine at the end (John 2:3-10)? Why are we told not to be drunk with wine, if OINON (οινον) means grape juice and not fermented grape juice – wine - (Eph. 5:18)? Why the deacons were not to be given to wine (οινω − ΟΙΝΟ), if it was just grape juice (1 Tim. 3:8)? These are questions to be answered from NT by those who insist on OINOS (οινοs) in Greek means ‘unfermented grape juice’ and nothing but that. Our Lord provided the best of the best wine (οινον) at the wedding feast at Cana. He also drank it at the last Passover that He presided on the night in which He was betrayed. We are asked not be drunk with wine. We should remember that the Passover was the only sacrifice He blessed with His presence, other than in Luke 2. In both Old Testament and New Testament, YAYIN and OINOS (οινοs) are used to indicate wine, grape juice that was pressed out, with the ability to make men and women drunk. Therefore it is translated correctly as wine, fermented grape juice. Before closing the thoughts on the new covenant, let us consider 2 Corinthians 3, once again. In verse 3 and 4 we read, “Ye are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read of all men, being manifested to be Christ’s epistle ministered by us, written, not with ink, but [the] Spirit of [the] living God; not on stone tables, but on fleshy tables of [the] heart.” The meaning of ‘fleshy’ is that it is soft and sensitive tables of the heart. It should not be read as “fleshly.” When Moses brought the old covenant from Mount Sinai, it was a shadow of a man’s heart. By nature it was irresponsive and unimpressionable, as dead and cold. Our hearts were such once. They are made sensitive to the love of God, soft compared to its former hardness, impressionable to write, responsive to His call, all by the power of the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ. So far, we have seen only a glimpse of the significance of the blood of the new covenant in the cup of blessing that we partake in the Lord’s Supper at the Lord’s Table. The realization of its significance compels us to pour out our praises, adoration, and worship to the Lord Jesus Christ who delighted in blessing us with all heavenly blessings.

33

Chapter VI

“This Is My Body, Which Is For You” “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not [the] communion of the blood of the Christ? The bread which we break, is it not [the] communion of the body of the Christ? Because we [being] many, are one loaf, one body; for we all partake of that one loaf… Ye cannot drink [the] Lord’s cup, and [the] cup of demons: ye cannot partake of [the] Lord’s table, and of [the] table of demons.” (1 Corinthians 10:16-17, 21) “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke [it], and said, This is my body, which [is] for you, this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink [it], in remembrance of me. For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). In connection with breaking of the bread, there are two aspects. First, it is in memory of the Lord’s death as we read in 1 Corinthians 11. Second, it shows the unity of the body, the Assembly, as we read in 1 Corinthians 10. First, let us look into the breaking of bread in memory of the Lord’s death. The bread precedes the cup to show the death of the Lord as the bruising of His body. Our Lord was bruised first and died afterwards. “He was bruised for our iniquity” (Isaiah 53:5). “He was taken from oppression and from judgment” (Isaiah 53:8). In Hebrews 9:27 we read about man’s condition as, “It is the portion of man once to die, and after this judgment.” Our Lord did not die as a progeny of Adam, to die first and then the judgment. He died as the Lamb of God, a sinless and perfect man. In our Lord’s case the judgment preceded His death. The righteous judgment of God was the cup He drank. When He completely drank of the cup, He uttered the victor’s cry of triumph, “It is finished.” Then He laid his head on his chest and committed His spirit to the Father’s hand and expired. The judgment was first, and then the death. Contrary to the Adamic race, His death was the result of the judgment; it was not a natural death. If it was a natural death, then the judgment should follow. On Calvary, the death followed the judgment of God on the Holy and Innocent One of God. As our substitute, He was judged first and then He died as its result. Those who are redeemed of the blood of the Lamb are not to be judged again. Those who died in Christ have no judgment to face. Our Savior was judged on our behalf. This is the beauty of the eternal salvation. This is the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. Therefore, we are asked to partake the bread first and then the cup, which represents the death of the Lord. Those who take them together are not remembering the death of the Lord, but they are remembering the Lord before His death, as He walked on this earth. If the blood is in the body, then it is not separated from the body or it is not shed. Then there is no redemption (Heb. 9:12). The power of redemption is the shed blood of the Lamb of God, and not the blood in the body. Those who see the bread and the cup do not partake on His judgment and death. When we partake them separately, after giving thanks to them separately, we are remembering the one who was judged for our iniquity and died as the result of that judgment. In Christendom, only certain privileged persons are allowed to break the bread, but others are allowed to partake of it. Thus a form of clergy and laity is introduced. Is this scriptural? We do not see any scriptural

34

justification for this practice. In the Old Testament, there were priests and priesthood under the law. The people were not allowed to approach God directly. They had priests to offer sacrifices and offerings, and to intercede. Christians are brought to God and have given boldness to enter into the presence of God by the blood of Jesus (Hebrews 10:19). The Lord’s Supper is not a sacrifice, an offering, or an intercession. We do not partake in remembering the Lord’s death while each one breaks the bread. The bread is already broken. We are not the breakers of His body. It was the wicked men that assembled and crucified Him that broke the body of the Lord. It is His body that which was broken we are partaking and eating. Before we partake of the bread we give thanks to God. In Matthew 26:26 and Mark 14:22 we read that the Lord blessed the bread or the loaf. Using these scriptures, some teach that the bread has to be ‘blessed’ or ‘consecrated’ before it is shared among the Christians. They forget that in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24 we read that the Lord gave thanks for the bread. They also forget that the Lord blessed the loaves in Mark 6:41 and Luke 9:16 before breaking it to be given to the people to eat. In John 6:11 and 23 we are told that the Lord gave thanks. We see the same expression in Mark 8:6-7 also. In Matthew and Mark we read that the Lord blessed the bread, but gave thanks for the cup. In Luke it is just, He gave thanks. In these scriptures we are taught that when the bread is blessed, it stands for giving thanks to God. It is not as if being consecrated before God. Therefore the Lord’s Supper is not a sacrament. In Luke 24:30 we read, “He took the bread and blessed it.” This is the last time He gave thanks to God. In the first century, to the Romans, a sacrament was a faithful oath of allegiance that a soldier made to their flag. In the third century, the Church fathers used this term, sacrament, to the Lord’s Supper and it became synonymous to the scriptural term, “Lord’s Supper.” They also named baptism and marriage also as sacraments. Thus the term ‘sacrament’ has become an ecclesiastical term and is used without much questioning. Every saint is equally competent to give thanks for the bread and the cup. As the women are to be silent in the assemblies, they are not to give thanks, in public, for the bread and the cup before passed around for the Christians to partake of it. The breaking of the bread is not an outward act of putting of Christ to death. Wicked men at the crucifixion did it. It is not a religious act. On the night in which He was betrayed, the Lord himself gave thanks and broke the bread. An indication that the one who give thanks is the one to break the bread. The communion comes later as individual partakes of the broken bread that represents the broken body. The breaking of the bread is a figurative act of the death of the Lord. A word about two erroneous teaching regarding the Lord’s Supper is to be addressed. These are known in the Christendom as transubstantiation and consubstantiation. Transubstantiation teaches the conversion or transformation of the substance of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. On the other hand, consubstantiation teaches that during the Lord’s Supper the body and blood of Christ coexists with the bread and wine. Both are resulted from wrongly explaining what our Lord said as stated in Matthew 26:26, “This is my body.” In Greek it is, “τουτο εστι το σωµα µου” (TOUTO ESTI TO MOU). It is a metaphor and not a simile. What is the difference between a metaphor and a simile? When one is compared to another, it is a simile. An example: our Lord said, “The doctrine of the Pharisees is like a leaven.” Lord is comparing ‘the doctrine of the Pharisees’ to that of ‘leaven.’ If the Lord said, “the doctrine of the Pharisees is leaven,” then it would have been a metaphor, because there is no comparison. In a metaphor, we say that one thing is another thing. In a metaphor there are rules that help us to understand it in detail. The rule is: When there are two nouns and a pronoun, the pronoun is always has to agree with the noun it is to be associated in gender. In Matthew 26:26, the pronoun is “This” (τουτο – TOUTO) and it is neuter in gender; and the two nouns are “Body” and “Bread.” The Greek word for ‘body’ is σωµα (soma), which is neuter in gender; and the Greek word for ‘bread’ is αρτοs (ARTOS), which is masculine in gender. The pronoun ‘this’ agrees with the noun ‘body’ and not with the noun ‘bread.’ Therefore, we read only a metaphor and no transubstantiation as taught by Roman Catholics or consubstantiation as taught by the Lutherans is implied. As a metaphor, the bread remains simply bread, and the wine simply wine. There is nothing more or less. It is materially and physically bread made of grain and wine of the juice of grape. Let me try to explain the

35

metaphor in another manner. I may use a picture of my wife to some one and say, “This is my wife.” My saying did not make a piece of paper with a picture to be my wife. Both of us are aware of this fact, still I could insist that it is my wife. It is how I see and remember her in her absence from me, while looking forward to see her in a near future. One could argue that it is not my wife; it is only a picture of her that reminds me of her. That is true, but I say it is my wife. Similarly the bread we partake of is the body and the cup we partake is the blood of our Lord and it reminds us of His death till He comes. I cherish my wife’s picture in her memory and I cherish more the bread and the cup in memory of my Lord. Is the breaking of bread an ordinance? In its strict sense, it is not. The breaking of bread is not a command. It is a privilege extended to the disciples of Jesus Christ to remember Him. On the contrary the feasts of the Old Testaments, including the feast of the unleavened bread, were a command. Those who refused to submit to observe those feasts were to be put to death, which made it an ordinance. We have seen that this is not a sacrament, as mentioned by the Christendom. Our Lord Jesus Christ has given us two signs. The first is baptism in connection with His death and resurrection. The second is the breaking of the bread, the Lord’s Supper, in connection with the memory of His death. When He said, “this do in remembrance of me,” He gave us a motive to observe and not an ordinance to submit to. We have no rules or liturgies as to breaking of bread other than “as often as,” a minimum of every Lord’s Day. It is not to be done in a party feeling, and the bread is to precede the cup. The whole assembly is to come together for the purpose and intention to remember the death of the Lord, as He desired us to do. To those who claim His desire as our command, we may consider it is in obedience to His command. The bread to precede the cup is indicative of the fact that he died. If the bread is dipped in the wine, then the blood is in the body. If the blood is in the body, then the Lord’s death has not taken place and there is no redemption. It will remain a sacrament, as claimed by Christendom, without the accomplishment of redemption. This is the direct result of materializing what the Lord instituted. Thus to them, their Eucharist remains a sacrament of non-redemption, and not of redemption. This will reduce Christianity to the level of Judaism. Thus making Christianity a religion of sacraments, forms, and pretensions, which are not even found in Judaism? We are told in 1 Corinthians 11:26, “Ye announce the death of the Lord.” In John 6:53-54 we read, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, unless ye shall have eaten the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in yourselves. He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood has life eternal.” Among the early Christians: Augustine, Chrysostom, Cyril, Theophylo, Luther, etc. considered the implication of the Lord’s Supper in John 6:51-59. From John 6:61 we could conclude that the eating and drinking are figurative or spiritual, but its effects are physical. The effects are; life eternal (6:54), “I will raise him up at the last day” (6:54), dwells in Christ (6:56), and living forever (6:58). To Adam death came through food, eternal life comes through the true food, Christ. Thus the gem of resurrection is imparted in the body of the believer (6:55). Let us look into John 6 a little more. It is true that we read in John 6:35, 41, 48, and 51 our Lord Jesus Christ’s statements, “I am the bread of life,” “I am the bread which has come out of heaven,” and “I am the living bread.” Similar statements about Him could be found in other passages, and they are: “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5), “I am the door of the sheep” (John 10:7,9), “I am the good shepherd” (John 10:11,14), “I am the resurrection and life” (John 11:25), “I am the way, and the truth, and the life” (John 14:6), and “I am the true vine” (John 15:1,5). All these are statements from the Lord Jesus Christ to the Jewish audience. Do that mean that He became the ‘light’ as we experience, a ‘door’ as we have in our house, a ‘shepherd’ feeding and taking care of the sheep as Moses and David were, etc. It is better for us to take the meaning of ‘eating and drinking the flesh and blood’ the same way as we accept the meaning of other similes, especially as listed above. In 6:51 we read that the Lord ‘give’ his flesh, but it is not repeated. But, ‘eating’ and ‘drinking’ is repeated. In 6:54 and 57 we read about ‘eating’ and the Greek word used is τρωγων (trogon) meaning ‘to break in pieces and eat’ or ‘to partake.’ While the word for ‘eat’ in 6:53 and 58 are φαγον (FAGON) meaning ‘to eat.’ The use of the word τρωγων is what made the saying too hard for the disciples (6:60). The use of that word made many to consider this passage as referring to the Lord’s Table. What we

36

forget is that the Lord’s Supper was not yet established or known. But the children of Israel knew eating the bread from heaven, because their fathers ate Manna in the wilderness. That incidence precedes this discussion in John 6. Eating and drinking are connected with: Life eternal (6:54), Dwells in Christ and Christ in him who eats (6:56), and Living forever (6:58). Dwells in Christ or Christ dwells in us is also seen in John 14:10; 16, 17; 15:4; 1 John 2:6; 3:15, 17; 4:12, 13, 15. It is similar to ‘putting on Christ” in Galatians 3:27 and Romans 13:14. This connection leads us away from any implication to the Lord’s Supper. Eating and drinking of the flesh and blood are spiritual, but its effects are physical – “I will raise him up” (6:54). As with Adam death came through food that was hanging on a tree, but “eternal life” comes through the food, Christ, whom the Jews saw as hanging on a tree. They never saw Him after His resurrection, except the disciples. Our Lord Jesus Christ planted the germ of ‘resurrection’ in the body of His disciples (6:55). In 6:62, Lord Jesus Christ did not say that what He said had only a spiritual meaning. Those who felt that what was said was a “hard saying,” He let them go. Flesh and blood are synonymous with “I am” (εγω – Greek). It should be considered corporally as His person. If we don’t, then we read only His death and not resurrection. Those who do not consider this corporeal meaning of His person are those who connect this with the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper is a remembrance of the Lord’s death till he comes (1 Corinthians 11:26). In John 6:54, our Lord Jesus Christ mentioned ‘resurrection’ in connection with this eating and drinking of His blood. This important fact is generally overlooked; we should not do so, because it is the Lord who said it. In connection with eating and drinking, we should consider 1 Corinthians 11:29 in our discussion. It reads, “For [the] eater and drinker eats and drinks judgment to himself, not distinguishing the Lord’s body.” The eater of the bread and drinker of the cup is expected to discern or distinguish the Lord’s body. If not, he is eating and drinking judgment to himself. In Lord’s Supper, what body is brought to our attention? It is the Lord’s body, after His death on the cross and before His resurrection from the dead. Our eyes must focus on His obedience, His finished work, and His perfect love. All these we see in the dead body of our Lord. We should not animate it with the body that was before His death. Before His death, the obedience was not complete, His work was not complete, or His love was not completely demonstrated. It was completed only when He said, “It is finished,” and gave up His Spirit into the hands of the Father and died. On the other hand, we should not animate His body with the life of the Son now raised, ascended, and seated at the right hand of the Father. His death is the basis for our salvation. It is the evidence of His obedience, “obedient even unto death.” It was the glorification of God. “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life that I may take it again” (John 10:17). The death of Christ put an end to the first creation whose head was Adam and the beginning of a new creation whose head is Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17). When we remember His death with this distinguishing, it is not a simple and ordinary remembrance, as we remember our dear ones. It is an institution of remembrance given to His own. We are to remember Him by the power of the Holy Spirit, nourished by Jesus, when He died on the cross. The efficacy of that work is eternal, complete, and perfect. We should not treat this institution of memorial with lightness. If we do, then we are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. Now we come to the second aspect that the Lord’s Table. It shows the unity of the body, the Assembly, as we read in 1 Corinthians 10:17, “We being many, are one loaf, one body; for we all partake of that one loaf.” To understand this “one body,” we should look into a few other scriptures. In Ephesians 2:16 we read about reconciling both the circumcised and uncircumcised in Christ “Might reconcile both in one body to God by the cross.” “Being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the corner-stone, in whom all the building fitted together increases to a holy temple in the Lord” (Eph. 2:20-21). “With a view to the edifying of the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:12). “There is one body, and one Spirit” (Eph. 4:4). “From whom the whole body, fitted together, and connected by every joint of supply, according to the working in its measure of each one part, works for itself the increase of the body to its self-building up in love” (Eph. 4:16). These verses teach us that the Assembly, that which Christ builds (Mat. 16:18), is the one body that we see in 1 Corinthians 10:17. This one body with many members is

37

bestowed with gifts sent from above. We read about these gifts in 1 Corinthians 12. These gifts are to be used in connection with the Lord’s Table by those who eat and drink the Lord’s Supper, his body and blood. “But all these things operates the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each in particular according as he pleases. For even as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of the body, being many, are one body, so also is the Christ.” (1 Corinthians 12:11-12). In the scriptures, we do not read about the union of churches. But we read about the union of the body, the Assembly, of Christ. Therefore, it is emphatically stated, “So also is Christ.” No particular assembly or church is in view. Again we read in Romans 12:4-6, “For, as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office; thus we, being many, are one body in Christ, and each one members one of the other. But having different gifts, according o the grace which has been given to us…” In Colossians 2:19 we read, “And not holding fast the head, from whom all the body, ministered to and united together by the joints and bands, increases with the increase of God.” It is the Assembly whose head is Christ the subject. The gifts are given for the edification of saints who are baptized into it by the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Christians are not members of a church, but they are members of the εκκλησια (EKKLESSIA), the Assembly or Church, the body and bride of Christ. It is God who set each of its members into this body of Christ and they together constitutes the one and only body of His. The unity of this one body is shown in partaking of the one bread and one cup at the Lord’s Table. This unity is expressed while it is on this earth. The Holy Spirit is not teaching about union of churches, but speaks about the unity of the body of Christ. This is the fundamental truth in the scriptures and Christendom has misapprehended it and disfigured it. The unity of the body of Christ is a divine principle and doctrine. It demands separation of the body from every thing that belongs to the Devil and his demons. Unity of the body is not an excuse to tolerate that, which belongs to the Devil or demons. This is brought to our attention in 1 Corinthians 10 in contrasting the communion of the body of Christ with that of the demons; the cup of the Lord with that of the demons; and the Lord’s Table with that of the demons. Partaking both is to provoke the Lord to jealousy. The individual members of the body of Christ, each Christian, is asked not to give an occasion to stumbling to Jews, Greeks, or the Assembly of God (1 Corinthians 10:32). Is the unity the unity of those who actually partake of the bread and the cup? The answer should be, NO! Those who provide the answer, “YES,” are those who favor independent churches. But inspired by the Holy Spirit, Apostle Paul was looking at them in connection with partaking at the Lord’s Table. Then it is added that it is a communion with the body of Christ. That is, we have the whole body of Christ in view. There is no partial view of the body of Christ or different tables of the Lord. One body and one Table of our Lord are presented for our sight. In 1 Corinthians 12:12 we read about the body of Christ as an abstract idea. In 1 Corinthians 12:27 we read, “Now ye are Christ’s body, and members in particular.” Here the body of Christ is given to us not just as in abstract, but in particular and specific. His physical body was broken. His abstract or mystical body is united as one, particularly by those who are called saints (1 Corinthians 1:2). The one loaf in 1 Corinthians 10:17 represent Christ. When we partake of this one loaf, we are affirming the unity or the oneness of the saints as one body. In 10:19-20, the sacrifice to idols is termed as sacrifice to demons. What is an idol? The Greek word for ‘idol’ is ειδοs (EIDOS) which means, ‘form.’ It is derived from ειδολων (EIDOLON), meaning ‘formling.’ Or ‘a little form.’ Every little form of demons is called ‘idols.’ Idolatry is all attendance and service rendered to every idol. Idolatry is not practiced under that name, but called in that function. People who are called by His name, “Christians,” by God should not practice it. The Corinthian Christians along with “those sanctified in Christ Jesus” are reminded that being the members of the body of Christ are to keep away from idols and those that belong to demons. We must beware of the ecclesiastical attempts at the same purpose of demarcation of scriptural boundaries for the purpose of uniting with the world against the unity of the body of Christ. We should remember that there are no members of a church. There exist only members of the body of Christ. Those who are members of the body of Christ are members one of another. No church has the authority to admit any one to the body of Christ. The Holy Spirit does it by the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which regularly comes at the cross at the time of conversion of a sinner.

38

Before we leave this subject, a word about the nature of the bread we eat at the Lord’s Supper may be appropriate. The word used is αρτοs (ARTOS) which means, ‘bread,’ or ‘loaf’ made with wheat. Some Christians raise the question, whether it was leavened or unleavened bread? The scriptures are silent about it. The word for anything unleavened is αζυµοs (AZUMOS) as in Mat. 26:17; Mark 14:1, 12; Luke 22:1, 7; Acts 12:3; 20:6; 1 Corinthians 5:7 and 8. Of course the bread used by our Lord in instituting the Lord’s Supper was unleavened. But, the Holy Spirit did not use αζυµοs (AZUMOS) in connection with the Lord’s Supper, but he used αρτοs (ARTOS). Therefore, the Holy Spirit left it for us to decide about the bread to be leavened or unleavened. It is not a doctrinal issue. In the Old Testament the Hebrew word for unleavened bread is MATSTSAH, which means ‘anything squeezed together,’ and is used in Genesis 19:3; Exodus 12:8, 15, 17, 18, 20; 13:6, 17; etc. The Hebrew word for bread is LECHEM, which means food, bread, or sustenance and we see it in Genesis 3:19; 14:18; 18:5; 21:14; etc. The ‘shew bread’ that was set before God is LECHEM PANIM as we read in Exodus 25:30; 35:13; 39:36, etc. In Hebrew PANIM means ‘face,’ or ‘presence.’ In this case, it stands for the presence of God. (The corresponding Greek expression is αρτοι τησ προθεσεωs (ARTOI TES PROTHESEOS), meaning ‘loaves of setting out,’ as in Matthew 12:4; Mark 2:26, and Luke 6:4. Another Greek expression is, προθεσιs των αρτων (PROTHESIS TON ARTON), meaning ‘setting forth of the loaves,’ as in Hebrews 9:2. Both are in connection with ARTOS and not with AZUMOS.) From these, we could say that the Hebrew word LECHEM could be leavened or unleavened bread. Again in Leviticus 23:17 when the two loaves are presented on the 50th day from the day of bringing the sheaf of the wave-offering, the Hebrew word used for loaf is LECHEM. This sheaf is the first fruit of their harvest and it was waved on the day after the Sabbath that is the first day of the week – the day of resurrection. Fifty days from then is again another first-day of the week, we call it the Day of Pentecost. It was the day the Jew and the Gentiles were brought together and presented as the body of Christ. Both the Jews and Gentiles are corrupted and are leavened, but accepted as Christians in the Beloved, because Christ - the first-fruit from the dead - was waived before God fifty days before that.. Not only that, there is a specific Hebrew word for leavened bread and that is CHAMETS as we read in Exodus 12:15; 13:3, 7; 23:18 and it is not used for ‘shew bread.’ The use of LECHEM in Hebrew and αρτοs (ARTOS) in Greek for the ‘shew bread’ in Old and New Testaments tell us that there is no doctrinal basis for insisting upon leavened or unleavened bread at the Lord’s Supper. At the Lord’s Table we meet as brethren, but we partake of the bread and the cup in the unity of the body.

39

Chapter VII

“The Night in Which He Was Delivered Up” “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke [it], and said, This is my body, which [is] for you, this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink [it], in remembrance of me. For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). In John 13 we read that Judas Iscariot went out from the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ in that night in which the Lord’s Supper was instituted. He went into the night. He never saw another day again. He never had the opportunity to see the body of the Lamb of God being broken and the blood being shed. Judas died before the night ended. He was busy with changing the importance of following, being a disciple of, the Lord Jesus Christ. He thought of showing the Master to those who wanted to destroy Him. He was busy to kiss the Master while being the leader of men to make money. He was asked to leave, in that night in which the Lord Jesus Christ instituted the Lord’s Supper. Judas Iscariot died in that night. The remaining apostles along with Apostle Paul taught the ‘disciples’ to gather together on the first day of the week to break bread (Acts 20:7). In partaking the Lord’s Supper we announce the Lord’s death till He comes. In Hebrews 9:27-18 we read about His coming, “And forasmuch as it is the portion of men once to die, and after this judgment; thus the Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear to those that look for him the second time without sin for salvation.” There are three things in this passage for us to remember, and they are: First, death is the natural portion of man. Second, this death is not the end of man, because a judgment is to follow this death. Third, as believers are concerned, this death and judgment have been born by Christ. As a consequence of this bearing of the judgment and death by Christ, we joyfully contemplate His second appearance. This is the difference between the unbelievers and believers in the present age in which we live. To a believer the second appearance of the Lord has nothing to do with sin. It is unto salvation. It is to place them in possession of the result of His first coming. Therefore, the meaning of salvation is revealed as the consummation of what we believe at this present age. To a believer, the Lord’s Supper is the most solemn activity to participate. It is far more precious than any other activity that he/she may engage in. It is in that activity that a believer expresses that which is precious to him/her. One may sing or pray about the Lord’s death, about His resurrection, about being asset at the right and of God exalted, about His imminent return to call us to be with Him. While doing so, others may hear about these. In all these we are announcing the death of the Lord in the presence of the angels and men before the Father. We announce the death of the Lord before the Father only in the Lord’s Supper. In this connection we ought to look into the difference between prayer, exhortation, teaching, preaching, worship, and announcing. We should not confound these together. They are all appropriate when we gather together unto the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Prayer contains our praises and thanksgiving to God. Exhortation is encouraging one another to be at the same level as the one who exhorts. Teaching is imparting the doctrines from the scriptures for the edification of the saints. In exhortation, and teaching one is speaking to the saints.

40

Worship is bowing before the Almighty God accepting His authority and admitting our unworthiness to be before Him without the washing by the blood of the Lamb of God. Our prayer and worship is toward God. It is in worship we adore Him. Please read the heavenly worship as written in Revelation 4:8 through 5:14. When we worship God it is from man to God. When a Christian worship, he/she draws near to God as his/her Father. This drawing near is accomplished in Jesus Christ. We address Him as our Father. We do not draw near to address God as the God of Abraham-Isaac-and-Jacob as the Jews do. The announcing of His death is before the Father to the angels in the heavenlies and men on this earth. In this light, the ‘cup’ at the Lord’s Supper becomes the “cup of blessing.” This “cup of blessing” will be ‘running over’ as written in Psalm 23. It will not be an empty ‘cup.’ In Acts 20:7 we read, “And the first day of the week we being assembled to break bread, …” We have to do it on the first day of the week. When the Corinthians failed to do this, Apostle Paul said that he does not praise them (1 Corinthians 11:17). The saints at Corinth changed the purpose of their gathering to eat their own supper, to show their support of sectarian behavior, showing off of spiritual manifestations and superiority, behaving like babes, without showing love, speaking in tongues, etc. They were told that their gathering should be to eat the Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:20). What was the reason that the disciples gathered together to break bread on the first day of the week? There may be at least three reasons. First, that is the day our Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead. Second, that is the day He appeared to the disciples as we read before His ascension. Third, it is in connection with the new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15). In Genesis 1 & 2 we read that God created everything in six days and rested on the seventh. To Abraham the sign of the covenant was given as circumcision. He was told to circumcise every man-child on the eighth day (Genesis 17:12). The eighth day was outside creation days of seven. As we are a new creation, we meet outside the old creation that ended with the seventh day. This new creation meets on the new first day to remember the death of the Lord Jesus Christ that satisfied the righteous demands of God. In Acts 20 we read that it was the “disciples” who came together to break bread. Unbelievers have no part in it. A ‘disciple’ is not only a believer, but who is a follower as we read in 1 Corinthians 11:1. In the Old Testament, only those who were redeemed by the blood of the lamb were to observe the feast of the Passover. They ate the Passover and redeemed by the blood of the lamb in Egypt and celebrated the Feast of Passover after that during their wilderness journey and the time of warfare against the principalities and powers in the Promised Land. It was a shadow of our remembering the death of the Lord till He comes. There was only one Passover. The feast of the Passover was to be done at the place that God choose to place His name (Deuteronomy 16:5-6). In our day, it is where two or three - who are redeemed by our Passover (1 Corinthians 5:7) - are gathered together in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, He is present (Matthew 18:20). On the first day of the week the early Christians gathered together to remember the death of the Lord till He comes. We do not go back to the cross, but we remember the death of the Lord. We also proclaim or declare the death of the Lord before the Father in the presence of the angels, where we fight against the principalities, authorities, universal lords of this darkness, and the spiritual powers of wickedness in the heavenlies (Ephesians 6). This is done in spirit and in truth (John 4). Then it becomes the highest point of our worship of our God. It is a memorial as the fest of the Passover was to Israel. This should be the primary object of our gathering in the 21st century. Before I close, I wish to address 1 Corinthians 11:27-29. “So that whosoever shall eat the bread, or drink the cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty in respect of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself, and thus eat of the bread, and drink of the cup. For the eater and drinker eats and drinks judgment to himself, not distinguishing the body.” These verses are usually taken out of its context and say that it is related to the eligibility of the individual that is mentioned here. Is that true? If we read this epistle, the First Epistle to the Corinthians, we read that there were men who were practicing things that even the heathen will not do. To deal with such immorality was the responsibility of the assembly. These three verses are strictly connected with the Lord’s Supper. How did they come together on the first day of the

41

week? That is what we have to understand. From verses 17 through 22 we read about this question of interest. Its inappropriateness and consequences are given in verses 27 through 29. It is not the personal eligibility that Apostle Paul is referring to; it is the MANNER of their gathering is what is brought up in these verses. An assembly must take actions against immorality and false doctrines. It is different from the manner in which they come together to eat the Lord’s Supper. We should not be gathering with sectarian divisions at the Lord’s Table. It is the Lord’s Table, it is not ours. It is the Lord’s Supper we are partaking; it should not be ‘our supper.’ It is not where we tell others how we are blessed in this world. It is the Lord’s death that should be in our mind. Let every one who eats the bread and drinks the cup remember the Lord’s death and not their own wealth, friendship, groups, and so on. Unfortunately, Satan has prevailed to take this important aspect away from many Christians. Presently, many teach that these verses tell us how we should be living and they are not concerned about the manner in which they gather together to break bread. In verse 18 we read about division among the Christians. That was the nature of their gathering. These divisions were created by individuals. They were asked to examine the appropriateness of those divisions at the Lord’s Table while eating the Lord’s Supper. On that night in which the Lord was betrayed, there existed a division. It was in the person of a disciple, Judas Iscariot was his name. In John 13 we read that the Lord asked him to leave and he went into the darkness of the night and did not see another day or the Lord’s death. Why divisions exist among Christians? I wish that each one who reads this may think about it and give an answer. While you are thinking about the answer, please allow me to give mine. “The divisions among Christians are the manifestation of the approved practices without scriptural justification.” This is my answer. I Corinthians 11:16 along with 1 John 2:19 teach that such contentions should not be tolerated, especially when we gather together to break bread. If we do, then we are gathered together not to eat the Lord’s Supper, but to eat and drink judgment to himself. In verse 29 we read about eating and drinking judgment to himself. The Greek word translated as “himself” is εαυτω (EAUTO). It is a third person reflexive pronoun and could be considered as singular or plural. It is derived from αυτου (AUTOU) which is translated as: myself, thyself, himself, ourselves, yourselves, or themselves. Therefore, it includes both genders, male and female. As it is a reflexive pronoun, the agent and the person acted on are the same. Therefore the Word of God requires that each one of us should examine ourselves, personally, about the manner and the intention of our gathering to eat the Lord’s Supper.

42

Chapter VIII

Lord’s Table, Lord’s Supper, and Worship It will be appropriate to write briefly about ‘Worship’ in connection with the Lord’s Table and Lord’s Supper. We come together to remember the death of our Lord Jesus Christ as He asked us to do. This is to be done on the first day of the week, as established by the apostolic tradition (Acts 20) as recorded by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. By doing what is asked of us to do by the Lord in obedience to His wish, we are also worshipping God. This worship is in accordance with the scriptures and is rooted in our obedience. Worship From The Old Testament: In the Old Testament there are four Hebrew words for ‘worship.’ They are: ABAD meaning ‘to serve,’ ATSAB meaning ‘to make an idol,’ SEGAD meaning ‘to bow down’ or ‘to do obeseiance,’ and SHACHAH meaning ‘to bow self down.’ ABAD appears more than 313 times and is translated in KJV as ‘worship’ at 2 Kings 10:19, 21, 22, and 23 and they are in connection with worshipping Baal. ATSAB appears in 18 places and it is translated as ‘worship’ in KJV in Jeremiah 44:19. There it was in connection with the worship of the children of Israel of the queen of heavens. In 16 places it is translated as “idol’ and at one place as ‘lamentable.’ SEGAD appears in Isaiah 44:15, 17, 19; 46:6; Daniel 2:46; 3:5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 18, and 28. In KJV it is translated as ‘to fall down’ or ‘to worship’ before an idol. SHACHAH appears over 172 times and is translated in KJV as ‘worship’ or in connection with paying homage to God. The first three appearances of SHACHAH are in Genesis 18:2; 19:1; and 22:5.In Genesis 18:2 we read that Abraham “bowed himself toward the ground” when Jehovah appeared to him in the form of three men. In Genesis 19:1 we read that Lot “bowed himself with his face toward the ground,” when he met the two angels. In Genesis 22:5 we read that Abraham said to his servants, “… I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.” This word SHACHAH is predominantly used in the Old Testament to indicate the worship of God. There are other occasions too. In Genesis 23:7 and 12 we read that Abraham stood up and bowed to the people of the land. This Hebrew word, SHACHAH, was used to indicate the humbling of a person before another or a group of people. This word is taken and used by the Holy Spirit in the Word of God to indicate the mode of worship that was acceptable to God in the Old Testament time. This word is also used in connection with worshipping “other gods” in Deuteronomy 4:19; 5:9; 8:19; 11:16; 17:3; 29:25-26; 30:17; … In Exodus 4:31 we read, “And the people believed. And when they heard that Jehovah had visited the children of Israel, and that he had seen their affliction, then they bowed their head and worshipped.” This worship was not in the house of Jehovah. It was a worship of those who believed that Jehovah has heard their cry and seen their affliction. In Exodus 12:27 we read that the people of Israel bowed their head and worshiped Jehovah when they heard about the Passover and the deliverance they are to receive from Jehovah. This is an act of worship of those who are to be delivered from the bondage of this prince of this world. They did humble themselves before their Redeemer and Savior before it happened and it was at the hearing of that good news, the gospel of their salvation. In Exodus 20 God wrote with His fingers, the Holy Spirit, that those who are redeemed by the blood of the lamb and delivered from the bondage of the prince of this world should not bow down (SHACHAH = worship) to any other gods nor to make images and call it as their gods. They are to worship only Jehovah their Redeemer and Savior.

43

The worship of Jehovah was to be in the beauty of holiness (1 Chronicles 16:29; Psalm 29:2; 96:9). The worship of Jehovah was to be at His footstool (Psalm 99:5; 132:7). The worship of Jehovah was to be at His holy hill or mountain (Psalm 99:9; Isaiah 27:13). Moses bowed and worshiped God (Exodus 34:8). Joshua fell at the feet and worshipped the Captain of the host of Jehovah (Joshua 5:14). The worship was to be before Jehovah (1 Samuel 1:19, 28). David went into the house of Jehovah to worship (2 Samuel 12:20; Psalm 5:7). When king Jehoshaphat and the people were told to stand still and see the salvation of Jehovah who was with them, the king bowed his face to the ground and the people fell down to worship Jehovah (2 chronicles 20:1419). When Hezekiah offered burnt offering, the congregation worshipped, the singers sang with the help of the hand instruments as ordained by David, and the Levites praised Jehovah (2 Chronicles 29:27-30). Worship exalts Jehovah the God (Psalm 99:5, 9). The worship was done in the tabernacle or the temple (Psalm 132:7; 138:2). All Judah was asked to enter at the gates to worship Jehovah (Jeremiah 7:2). Jehovah speaks to those who came to worship Him at His house (Jeremiah 26:2). In the millennium the prince shall enter into the inner courts of the temple through the gates and shall offer burnt-offering and peace-offering and worship at the threshold of the gate (Ezekiel 46). Keeping the feast of tabernacle was worship (Zechariah 14:16-17). Those who insist on using musical instruments in worship usually refer to their use as ordained by David and ordered to be included in worship by Hezekiah. They conveniently overlook what God said about this practice in Amos 6:1-7. There Jehovah said through Amos, His prophet, that the institution of musical instruments by David was not pleasing to Him (Amos 6:5). This prophecy took place during the days of Uzziah king of Judah and Jeroboam king of Israel. From 2 Kings 15 & 16 we learn that Uzziah reigned before Hezekiah. Therefore, the prophecy of Amos took place years before Hezekiah reinstituted the musical instruments in the temple as part of worship, but after David. It was not according to the wishes of Jehovah. In the Laws given through Moses on Mount Sinai, we do not read about musical instruments to be used in the tabernacle as part of the worship of Jehovah. We should not make David’s and Hezekiah’s actions as an excuse and justification to do what Jehovah has said as not pleasing to Him. This prophecy of displeasure of Jehovah about the use of the musical instrument came after its first introduction by David and its reinstitution by Hezekiah. In 1 Samuel 15:22-23 we read, “Has Jehovah delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in hearkening to the voice of Jehovah? Behold, obedience is better than sacrifices, attention than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and selfwill is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of Jehovah, He hath also rejected thee from being king.” After hearing this admonition, Saul asked Samuel to help him to worship Jehovah and we read in 1 Samuel 15:21 that Saul did worship Jehovah that day with the help of Samuel. The offering of sacrifices was part of the Old Testament worship. This we read at other places, especially from Genesis 22 and 1 Samuel 15. From these passages in the Old Testament we learn what worship is? Worship of God is to be before God, in the beauty of holiness; at His footstool; in his holy mountain (hill); in the tabernacle; in the temple; bowing down towards the earth; at any place; at the hearing of God’s salvation; by those who are redeemed by the blood of the lamb and have seen the salvation of God; by those with whom God is; in His house; by offering sacrifices; praising God; exalting God; singing songs to God; keeping the appointed feast; in obedience to God’s word; without any rebellion by changing God’s word; without selfwill, not as an act of idolatry; without rejecting God;… Worship From The New Testament: Having looked into the Old Testament on ‘worship’ let us look into the New Testament. The various Greek words that are translated as ‘worship’ are: δοξα (DOXA) meaning ‘glory’ or ‘esteem;’ ευσοβεω (EUSOBEO) meaning ‘to be reverential’ or ‘to be pious;’ θεραπευω (ThERAPEUO) meaning ‘to serve’ or ‘to heal;’ λατρευω (LATREUO) meaning ‘to worship publicly;’ νεωκοροs (NEOKOROS) meaning ‘a temple sweeper;’ προσκυνεω (PROSKUNEO) meaning ‘to kiss (the hand) toward;’ and σεβαζοµαι or σεβοµαι (SEBAZOMAI or SEBOMAI) meaning ‘to venerate.’

44

∆οξα (DOXA) appears about 166 times and only once in Luke 14:10 it is translated in KJV as ‘worship.’ Eυσοβεω (EUSOBEO) appears in two places. In 1 Timothy 5:4 it is translated in KJV as ‘show piety’ and in Acts 17:23 as ‘worship.’ Θεραπευω (ThERAPEUO) appears in 44 places and only in Acts 17:25 it is translated as ‘worship.’ Λατρευω (LATREUO) appears in 21 times and it is translated in KJV as ‘do service’ once, ‘serve’ 16 times, ‘worship’ four times (Acts 7:42; 24:14; and Philippians 3:3), and ‘worshipper’ once (Hebrews 10:2). This Greek word, λατρευω (LATREUO), appears in connection with man’s service to God. Νεωκοροs (NEOKOROS) appears in Acts 19:35 and in KJV it translated as ‘worshipper.’ Προσκυνεω (PROSKUNEO) appears 60 times and it is translated in KJV as ‘worship.’ The first three occurrences are in Matthew 2:2, 8, and 11 and they are in connection with the wise men coming to worship Jesus Christ at His birth. In Matthew 4:9 and Luke 4:7 we read the demand of the Devil to Christ to fall down and worship him and in answer Lord said that only God should be worshipped (Matthew 4:10; Luke 4:8). We also read about the worship offered by lepers (Matthew 8:2), rulers (Matthew 9:18), women (Matthew 15:25), disciples (Matthew 28:9; Luke 24:52), mother of disciples (Matthew 15:25; 28:9), men possessed by evil spirits (Mark 5:6), the Father looks for those who worship Him in spirit and in truth (John 4:23-24) and this should be in body while on this earth (Psalm 115:17; Isaiah 38:18-19), those who received healing (John 9:38), Greeks (John 12:20), falling on his face to worship (1 Corinthians 14:25), all angels of God worship (Hebrews 1:6), Jacob worshipping by faith by leaning on the top of his staff (Hebrews 11:21), fall down and worship (Revelation 4:10; 5:14; 7:11; 11:1-16; 19:4, 10), and worship God with fear (Revelation 14:7). Προσκυνεω (PROSKUNEO) is a compound word by the combination of προs (PROS = towards) and κυνων (KUNON is a primitive word for ‘dog’). When these two Greek words are combined as Προσκυνεω (PROSKUNEO), then it means “to lean forward like a dog to lick or kiss the hands of his master.” Therefore, it is used to indicate homage paid by men to those who are of superior rank. In this connection we should read Matthew 2:2, 8, 11 and the rest of the places this Greek word is used. Most of them are provided in the previous paragraph. It is also used in the New Testament to indicate homage paid to God and the risen and ascended Christ. In Revelation we also read this word in connection with worship of demons, heavenly beings, Satan, and his agents on earth. In these days this Προσκυνεω (PROSKUNEO, kissing the hand) is practiced among many Christian churches. In the Orthodox churches, the laymen (common men) are expected to kiss the ring of their Bishops, their spiritual leaders. [I always remember an incident in my life in this connection. In the summer of 1965, I was asked to appear for an interview at Marthoma College, Thiruvalla. When my turn came for the interview, I was asked to enter through a certain door of the interview room. As I entered I found that I had to pass by Yohannon Marthoma Metropolitan to arrive at my seat and he was sitting with his hands stretched out. I took his hand in my hand and gave him a hand-shake saying, “It is nice to meet you.” What I remember is the facial expression of the Metropolitan and his twelve (12) associates at the table. The 12 associates were seated on both sides of the table, six on each side. I did not kiss his hand, because I was not inferior to him. As a matter of fact, I was a son of God and he was not. It was he who made fun of those who believed in the literal appearance of my Lord as He ascended to heaven at a Student Christian Movement (SCM) meeting at the Centenary Hall, Thiruvanandapuram. It was he who gave an interview to Thani Niram, a Communist weekly, and said that the incarnation of the Son of God was like the birth of Rama and Krishna. I considered this man as a lost sinner and refused to kiss his hand and also refused to acknowledge his superiority for a job.] Σεβαζοµαι or σεβοµαι (SEBAZOMAI or SEBOMAI) is translated in KJV as ‘worship’ in Matthew 15:9; Mark 7:7; Acts 16:14; 18:7, 13; 19:27; and 2 Thessalonians 2:4. A prayer is a request that we place before God and we are told that that should be done in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ (John 16:23). When we say the name of the Son as “Lord Jesus Christ,” we are admitting His deity (“Lord”), humanity (“Jesus”), and office (Christ = Messiah) in one breath. There we show His

45

superiority and our place as a dog before his master. In this context, prayer is a part of our worship. In Matthew 6 we read about how we should pray. Praise is an aspect of worship. In Matthew 6:9 tells us that our prayer should start with glorifying the Father’s name. Glorifying God is an aspect of our worship. In Revelation we read this in connection with the heavenly worship of angels, heavenly creatures, and elders, and multitudes. Giving thanks is an aspect of our worship. We read about this in Luke 17:16. The Samaritan leper fell down at the feet of the Lord and gave thanks. We have seen that falling down is the literal meaning of the Greek word (προσκυνεω - PROSKUNEO) that is translated as worship. In Romans 12:1 we are asked to present our bodies as a living sacrifice that is holy and acceptable to God. Doing so is an aspect of our worship. Our worship has at least two natures. They are personal worship and corporate worship. We should not confound these two. Coming together to eat the Lord’s Supper is an act of corporate worship in obedience to our Lord’s wish to remember His death till He come. It is to be done “as often as” we can. Coming together to eat the Lord’s Supper at the Lord’s Table is not the sole act of corporate worship. Acts 20 and 1 Corinthians 16 tells us that this act of worship in remembering the Lord’s death should be on the first day of the week. A careful study will tell us that it is the minimum requirement that is established and practiced by the apostles. This minimum requirement was accepted by the Holy Spirit and it pleased God to be included in the Word of God for our instruction. In this most important corporate worship we have to pay attention to what our Lord Jesus Christ established when He instituted it for the first time. He asked Judas Iscariot to leave before the institution of the Lord’s Supper. He did not have the Light and he went out into the night and never saw another day. When the Lord Jesus Christ asked him to leave, He knew that Judas Iscariot would come and kiss Him in the Garden. The Lord Jesus Christ asked the one who had all the intention to kiss Him in public to leave the room, because he was the betrayer. Lord Jesus Christ also knew that Peter will deny Him three times on the same night. Knowing this, He also prayed for him. He did not ask Peter to leave the room. He was to eat the Lord’s Supper along with the other ten. This included John, whom He loved. Peter ate the Lord’s Supper along with John, but Judas Iscariot didn’t. There was also a debate about who is the greatest among them. They all ate the Lord’s Supper from the Lord Jesus Christ. Our personal differences and desires should not be the prominent qualifications to participate or to debar one from the Lord’s Supper. One who joins with the world and who has agreed to betray the Lord for profit should be debarred from eating the Lord’s Supper. Our personal preferences and opinions are not be used as a qualification or a disqualification to participate in the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper belongs to Him and we are only partakers of it at the Lord’s Table. One like John has the same right to partake of it as one like Peter, but not one like Judas Iscariot. In 1 Corinthians 11:20 we read that this corporate worship is to take place in one specified place in a locality. All believers in a locality, in Corinth all saints at Corinth, are expected to gather at one place. No one have the right to split the body of Christ in a given locality. The corporate worship is done as one body (1 Corinthians 10:16-17). If we read this epistle from the beginning, chapters 1 through 10, we will get some idea about the moral condition of the saints at Corinth. From chapters 11 through 14 we learn about the spiritual condition of the same saints at Corinth. They were told that they should come together to declare the death of the Lord till He come. We should abandon meeting separately at different places in the same locality to eat the Lord’s Supper because of our personal preferences and family feud. When we meet at different places in the same locality, then we are dividing the local body of Christ. At the same time all these different bodies are united in one glorified Head, the Christ, in heaven. It is not a good picture. One glorified head in heaven joined with many bodies on a small locality on earth. That is not what God intended to have. I am not writing about those who meet at different places because of geographical constraints in large cities. Our corporate worship should have the character of one body at one place in obedience to His word to remember what God has done

46

for us with thanks giving, praises, adoration, and in the unity of one body. Our ideas, preferences, leadership, position, family status, wealth, etc. should have no place at the Lord’s Table. The Heavenly Worship: We read about the heavenly worship in Revelation 4, 5, 7, 11, and 19. “And when the living creatures shall give glory and honor and thanksgiving to him that sits upon the throne, who lives to the ages of ages, the twenty-four elders shall fall before him that sits upon the throne, and do homage to him that lives to the ages of ages; and shall cast their crowns before the throne, saying Thou art worthy, O our Lord and our God, to receive glory and honor and power; for thou hast created all things, and for thy will they were and they have been created.” (Revelation 4:9-10) “And every creature which is in the heaven and upon the earth and under the earth, and those that are upon the sea, and all things in them, heard I saying, To him that sits upon the throne, and to the Lamb, blessing, and honor, and glory, and might, to the ages of ages. And the four living creatures said, Amen; and the elders fell down and did homage.” (Revelation 5:13-14) “And all the angels stood around the throne and the elders and the four living creatures, and fell before the throne upon their faces and worshipped God, saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honor, and power, and strength, to our God, to the ages of ages. Amen.” (Revelation 7:11-12) “And the twenty-four elders, who sit on their thrones before God, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God, saying, We give thanks, Lord god Almighty, He who is, and who was, that thou hast taken they great power and hast reigned…” (Revelation 11:16-17) “And the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and did homage to God who sits upon the throne, saying, Amen, Hallelujah.” (Revelation 19:4) Who are these twenty-four elders? In Deuteronomy 21:1-9 we read about the elders of Israel. In Acts 14:23; 20:17-28; Titus 1:5; Hebrews 13:17; and 1 Peter 5:1-5 we read about the elders of the assembly. All references to elders in the Word of God are in connection with man. The elders had crowns on their heads. What is the significance of having crowns on their head? We may get some light to this question from Revelation. The last occurrence of the title, “Son of man,” to the Lord Jesus Christ is in Revelation 14:14. There the Son of man was having a golden crown on His head. The crown indicates the exalted position of the wearer. The twenty-four elders having crowns indicate their exalted position before God. These twenty-four elders were sitting before God. No angel or heavenly creatures sit before God. They stand before God. The sitting indicates that the elders were not serving, but being placed in an exalted position above the angels by God. When the elders worshipped God and the Lamb, they cast their crowns at His feet. They humbled themselves and not only said, but also showed that they are not worthy to worship God and the Lamb in their exalted position. They fell down and cast their crowns, their rewards, at His feet. In Isaiah 38:18-19 we read, “For not Sheol shall praise thee, nor death celebrates thee; they that go down into the pit do not hope for thy truth. The living, the living, he shall praise thee, as I this day: the father to the children shall make known thy truth.” These verses tell us that the worship is in man’s body. In Psalm 115:17 we read, “The dead praise not Jah, neither any that go down into silence.” This tells us that the worship is not in spirit and without the body. What we read in John 4:23-24 is that the Father seeks those who are living on this earth to worship God in spirit and truth in their body. This agrees with Romans 12:1 that tells us that our bodies are to be living sacrifices that are holy and acceptable to God. In 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4 we read that the saints will be given a spiritual body, for both the dead and the living, and will be caught up to be with the Lord for ever. The elders in heaven were worshipping in their bodies.

47

The twenty-four elders were sitting on thrones. Revelation 3:21; 2 Timothy 2:11; and Luke 22:28 tell us that the thrones are rewards to man from the Lord. Similarly we read in 1 Peter 5:4 that the crowns are also rewards to man from the Lord. There are different crowns to be given as our rewards. They are: Crown (Philippians 4:1), Incorruptible Crown (1 Corinthians 9:23-27), Crown of Boasting (1 Thessalonians 2:19), Crown of Righteousness (2 Timothy 4:6-8), Crown of Life (James 1:12; Revelation 2:10), and Crown of Glory (1 Peter 5:4). The twenty-four elders were wearing white robes. In Revelation 3:5 we read that the white robe is given to the overcomer as a reward. All these twenty-four elders were wearing rewards, more than one, while they were sitting on the throne before God. In Daniel 7:9 we read about the throne, but fail to see the elders. The absence of the elders on the throne indicates that it was a mystery at the time of Daniel. Revelation 5:8-10 tell us that the elders who sang to the Lamb are those who were made kings and priests to God from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation. In Revelation 5:8, 11, and 13 we also see an order of worship. The first order is the living creatures and elders. The second order is that of the angels. The third order is that of the creatures. The final order is that of the living creatures and elders. The heavenly worship in Revelation begins and ends with the living creatures and elders. These elders are not spirits. They were in their bodies. We read about them having heads; faces; they sat; hands; they fell down on their faces; they wore garments, crowns. They placed their crowns at the feet of the One who sat on the throne. They did not sing when they were at His feet paying homage, worship. All these tell us that the twenty-four elders in Revelation are human beings who were redeemed by the blood of the Lamb. They are overcomers with the right to be kings and priests unto God (Revelation 5:10; 1:6). They are not angels or heavenly creatures. They used hand held instruments of music while sitting on the throne and praising God having crowns of rewards on their heads. When they were worshipping they removed those crowns of rewards and placed it at the feet of God and the Lamb, who was the object of their worship. Even in heaven men do not cover their head, even with a crown of reward received from God, while worshipping God. [Unfortunately, this is not what is practiced by many churches. The priests and bishops cover their heads when they perform ‘Communion Service,’ which they call as worship of God.] What are the different aspects of the heavenly worship in Revelation? They are: 1.

Fell down before the One whom they worshipped. (4:10; 5:8, 14; 7:11; 11:16; 19:4);

2.

Cast their crowns at His feet (4:10);

3.

Said that He is worthy to receive glory (4:11; 5:12; 7:12);

4.

Said that He is worthy to receive honor (4:11; 5:12; 7:12);

5.

Said that He is worthy to receive power (4:11; 5:12; 7:12);

6.

He was worthy because He created all things by His will (4:11);

7.

Prayer (5:8);

8.

The death of the Lamb to redeem them (5:9)

9.

He was worthy to receive riches (5:12; 7:12);

10.

He was worthy to receive wisdom (5:12; 7:12);

11.

He was worthy to receive strength (5:12; 7:12);

12.

He was worthy to receive blessing (5:12; 7:12);

13.

He was worthy to receive thanksgiving (7:12; 11:17)

48

Our Worship: We are told that we have the right to be called the “sons of God” (John 1:12-13). We are told that we have received the Holy Spirit. He was sent from the Father by the Son and He abides in us (John 14:17). We are told that the Father and the son made their abodes with us (John 14:23). We are told that the Father wants us to worship Him in spirit and truth (John 4:23).We are told that our bodies should be a living sacrifice unto God (Romans 12:1). We are told that when we come together in one place to eat the Lord’s Supper, there is an order of hierarchy. That order is woman’s head is man, man’s head is Christ, and Christ’s head is God (1 Corinthians 11:1-17). We are told that when we come together in one place to eat the Lord’s Supper, it must be to eat the Lord’s Supper and not for any other thing (1 Corinthians 11:17-24). We are told that when we come together in His name, it is not to show off our wealth, our spiritual gifts, and our spiritual superiority to speak to God in unknown language, etc. (1 Corinthians 12-14). We are told that the collections are to be on the first day of the week, without any solicitation or request (1 Corinthians 16:1-3). We are told that we are the temple - a habitation - of God (1 Corinthians 3:3:16-17; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:21; Revelation 3:12). We are told that our bodies are the temple - a habitation - of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19). We are told that we are taken out of this world by God (Acts 15:14) to be made members of the Assembly (εκκλησια - EKKLESIA = “called out”) that Christ builds (Matthew 16:18). We are told that we are placed in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 1:3; 2:6). We are told that we have (not ‘should’ or ‘to have’) boldness to approach the throne of grace (Hebrews 4:6). We are told that we are baptized with the Holy Spirit (acts 1:5). We are told that we have the filling of the Holy Spirit as we are in need (Acts 2:4; 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9). We are told that we are anointed with the Holy Spirit (1 John 2:20, 27). We are told that we are sealed with the Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 1:22; Ephesians 1:14; 4:30). We are told that we have the earnest of the Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5; Ephesians 1:14). We are told that we have the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:17). We are told that we have the promise of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 3:14; Ephesians 1:14). Collectively we are the Body of Christ united to Him as the glorified head in heaven (Romans 12:5; Ephesians 1:22-23). We are God’s house (1 Corinthians 1:2; 1 Timothy 3:15). We are the lamp stand (Revelation 1 through 3). We are the temple (Ephesians 2:21). We are the bride of Christ (Ephesians 5). As the priests of the Old Testament went into the temple to worship God putting on their holy garments we are asked to put on Christ (Galatians 3:27). In that position, we are to have boldness to worship God individually and corporeally. Our worship should have all the aspects of the worship of God as demanded by God in the Old Testament and New Testament. It should definitely have all the aspects of the heavenly worship. All these aspects should be in spirit and truth as we being placed in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus. We fall at His feet and worship God in spirit and truth. When we fall at His feet we have no opportunity to look at each other to compare or disqualify any. One may ask, what are these aspects? Please read over the sections above with subtitles: “Worship From The Old Testament,” “Worship From The New Testament,” and “Heavenly Worship.” What Should We Be Careful About In Our Worship? As human beings, our thoughts are according to our earthly wisdom and understanding. We mould our thinking accordingly. We learn from those things that are around us. We learn in succession as we grow, physically or spiritually. We subject what we gather from the word of God as well as from the world and mix them together, knowingly or unknowingly. This follows a logical path that we learned from the world’s educational system, which of course is fallible by all means. Using all our mental abilities we try to strain and purify what we read and this include both secular and spiritual matters. We forget that our mental faculties are formed out of the dust of this earth that is already stained with sin. Using this sin stained mental faculties we form our teachings, forgetting that we are dealing with the infallible-immutable-inspired (God-breathed) words of God. Forgetting this truth about God’s word, we call what we fashion as heavenly. If any reminds us about the importance of the Word of God, then we find excuses to give importance to our teachings that are formed out

49

of our sin stained mental faculties that used the fallible logic of this world to form it. We forget that the God’s words are the revelation of His mind and will. The ideas about heaven without the authority of the divine revelations are only things of the dust of this earth, however colorfully painted that may be with the wisdom of man. We should always remember that man invents many ways to worship God and then blames God for not accepting that worship. That is Cain’s syndrome. God told Cain that if he could worship Him as he knows how it should be done without any deviation, then his worship will be accepted. What did Cain do? He did banish, killed to be exact, his brother from the earth so that Abel will not continue to worship God according to His desires. Cain might have thought that without Abel to worship, God had no choice but to accept that of his as fashioned by his sin stained mind. Do we debar our brethren (they are our brethren because we have the same Father) from the Lord’s Table, not our table, from partaking the Lord’s Supper because of our personal agenda? No one has the authority to disqualify one who is a child of God from partaking the Lord’s Supper at the Lord’s Table; unless that person teaches or holds doctrines that are contrary to the Word of God or engaged in immoral activities. We should not make the Lords’ Table as “our table” and Lord’s Supper as “our supper.” God demands and require that our worship should be in accordance with the revelation of His mind and will. Our worship of God should not be as it is conceived by man. It is the Sovereign who decides how His subjects are to come before Him and pay homage (worship) to Him. The subjects have no say in the manner in which they worship the Sovereign. We are not discussing about a democratic society. We are discussing about our position before the eternal, almighty, immutable,… God. People’s power, democracy, has no place before God. Before God, there is only one power, God’s power. At the Lord’s Table we should be submitted to the Lord’s power and not that of man’s. We come to His table to eat His supper. We are coming as God’s children and not as the masters of the table. We usually forget that the true worship is an expression of our hearts. It should not be an outward demonstration of our self. To worship God, we must know Him as He is. To worship Christ, we should know Him as He is. Without that we cannot worship God and Christ in spirit and truth as the Father wants. An unbeliever cannot worship God and Christ in spirit and truth. Satan, his angels, and his followers will bend their knees before the Son and God. We read about this in the Epistle to Philippians, chapter 2. That is an outward worship, but not in spirit and truth. Their worship is the admission of His sovereignty over them. Ours is in spirit and truth and is done willingly with cheerful and grateful hearts. Worship is an act of man towards God. This worship should not be confounded or confused with ministry. Ministry is not towards God. Ministry comes from God towards man. During the early days of reformation, John Calvin replaced the Lord’s Supper with hymn singing and preaching. His reasoning was that too much familiarity with the Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper will reduce its importance in the minds of the common man. To improve the importance of the Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper he changed its observation from the first day of the week to once a month. He gave ministry to have prominence over the remembrance of the Lord’s death till He come. Preaching is an important aspect of ministry. Unfortunately, John Calvin did confound worship with ministry. No one preach to God but to men. He changed the importance of the Lord’s Supper as we read in Acts 20 to what happened after the breaking of bread. In acts 20 the disciples gathered together to break bread and after they broke bread Apostle Paul discoursed to them. In the present days, the pastors discourse to those who are gathered without breaking bread. This preaching is also accompanied by ‘singing by others to others,’ the singing by choir. In the Epistle to the Ephesians we are told to make melodies in our hearts. Instead, people are satisfied with listening to the singing of others. This is singing by others to others and not to God. Those who are entertained praise the singing of the choir and go home thinking that they worshipped God corporately. These are the most undeniable errors that crept into Christendom at the reformation in the Christian worship.

50

Both worship and ministry have vector characteristics. They are not scalar with magnitude only. They are vectors having both direction and magnitude. The magnitude depends on the source of the generation of the force of action. As ministry is from God to man and has vector characteristics. Its force and magnitude is immeasurable and it is up to us to receive in its full measure. Its direction is from God to man. Its source is God and not man. Therefore, its magnitude is immeasurable. On the other hand, the direction of worship is from man towards God and its force and magnitude depends on our position and our approach to God. A sinner cannot come before God to worship Him in spirit and truth. There is no magnitude in his worship. It is scalar in its character. Only in the Son and guided by the Holy Spirit man could worship God. This is the meaning of “worship in spirit and truth.” Being washed in the blood of the Lamb of God - the Son - when a man stands before God, God does not see a sinner. God sees His only beloved Son in the sinner, being put on Christ and washed by the blood of the Lamb of God. That is what gives us the boldness to approach the throne of grace. God sees Christ in us. We worship and He accepts. This worship could be personal, as a family, or as corporeal. All are different but only in Christ as we being placed in the heavenlies. Those who are not placed in the heavenlies cannot worship God in spirit and truth. When we worship, the object of our worship is God. The ground and material of our worship is Christ, the Son. The power of our worship is the Holy Spirit. That makes, Lord’s Supper to be the most important or primary aspect of our worship, corporeally as an assembly of saints. That is not the only worship. Our worship should have the character of falling down at the feet of Him whom we worship in spirit and truth. If and when we fall down to worship in spirit and truth, we do not have the freedom or liberty to think about those who are around us. We do not have the luxury of comparing ourselves with others to see who is greater than the other. We are to Προσκυνεω (PROSKUNEO), “to lean forward like a dog to lick or kiss the hands of his master,” in our worship. We do not have the convenience to debar another child of God from partaking from worship in obedience to His command. We should forbid Judas Iscariot from partaking in our worship, but we should not forbid Peter from partaking it along with us. We who are placed in the heavenlies should not limit our worship to Lord’s Supper only. Lord’s Supper is one of the primary aspects of the corporate worship. We should also worship God personally and as family. In the heavenly worship and in the Old Testament worship we do not see the Lord’s Table or the Lord’s Supper. Eating the Lord’s Supper at the Lord’s Table in remembrance of the Lord’s death is a Christian privilege during the age of grace on this earth and it will cease to be a part of worship at His coming to take us to be with Him in what we call “Rapture.” The remembering of the death of the Lamb in worship will continue and we read about this in the heavenly worship in Revelation. We see the human worship in many ways in the Word of God. I wish to state three of them. First, No sheep, goats, or animals were allowed to be raised within the city limits of Jerusalem. The only animals that were allowed to be brought into Jerusalem were for the sacrifices at the temple. For this purpose the temple authorities raised sheep and other animals on the nearby hills. They also used this to make themselves rich. That is why our Lord Jesus Christ whipped those animals and set the birds free two times. By whipping them, He made them unacceptable for sacrifices. The shepherds who were keeping the sheep for sacrifice were told about the birth of the Son, the Lamb of God, and were asked to go and worship Him. In other words, they were told that the true Lamb of God is born in Jerusalem and they need not be caring for the animals that are types of the true One. Then they were told to go, see Him, and worship Him. They did exactly that in a manger at the feet of the Son who was wrapped in swaddling cloths. Second, the wise men from the east were told about the birth of a king by the appearance and guidance of a star. They came and worshipped the King in the house, when He was a child of two years old. Third, Nicodemus, a teacher of the law, came to the Son by night to see light. He was told by the Son that the lifting up of the Son of man is the beginning of his worship. We see that Nicodemus at the cross worshipping Him in public along with another rich man – Joseph of Arimathaea. He was not ashamed, being a member of Sanhedrim – the ruling group of Jewish supreme seventy, to bring the spices to embalm the body of the Son of man and to carry His body to the new tomb. This was worship of such a higher magnitude. These two men exalted the body of the Lord Jesus Christ before Jews and Gentiles

51

without being ashamed of it. One did not debar the other. They two carried the broken body together before the Jews and Gentiles. They remembered their Lord at His death without any reservation. This is worship at its purity. These are the worships – one in a manger, one in a house, and the other at the foot of the cross with the broken body of the Lord - that the Father is looking for in us in spirit and truth. We should not be trying to kiss the Son as Judas Iscariot did. Judas Iscariot did not fall down to worship to kiss His feet, but he kissed Him on His cheek to show the world how he worships the Son. He came to kiss the Son with the world as its leader with the pomp of having a militia (Acts 1:16). We must be willing to kiss the feet of whom we worship. The shepherds did that in the manger, the wise men did that in a house, and Nicodemus who came to the Son by night because of the fear of the Jews did worship Him in public without any fear of the same Jews he feared before (John 3) by carrying the body of the Lord. Nicodemus, when he saw the Son of Man being lifted up as Moses lifted up the serpent, brought myrrh and aloes. He along with Joseph of Arimathaea wrapped the precious and priceless burden in the costly linen cloths and placed it in the new sepulcher. The one who was placed in a manger wrapped in swaddling clothes at birth was placed in a tomb wrapped in costly linen with myrrh and aloes at His death. The One who was born of a virgin was placed in a virgin tomb at His death. The One who was placed in a tomb in the evening was raised early in the morning. The One who refused to come down from the cross to show His power had the power to raise Himself from the dead. He did not show His power on the cross to come down as He was challenged by Jews and Gentiles. Do you know why? It was to save you and me. Both Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea start to worship in public at the sight of the death of the Lamb of God. They discarded their former form of worship. They worshiped Him at His death. We are asked to remember His death. It should not take a second place to show and tell off of our wealth, health, etc as some do. If “we preach Christ crucified,” why do we have to make His death a secondary aspect of our worship? It should be the primary aspect of our worship. The word “primary” implies that there are others to follow and not to precede it. The worship of Israel was to be at the place of God’s choice. When our Lord Jesus Christ was on this earth, they worshipped God in a temple without His presence. Now we are being put on Christ and being placed in the heavenlies in Christ, we are at His presence. We must come to worship as we are. Each of us is to come as being sinners saved by grace and washed by the blood of the Lamb of God. Our worship starts at the memory of the Lord’s death. We declare that openly at the Lord’s Table by partaking of the Lord’s Supper. Man has a tendency to look at the cloth he wears as a sign of spiritual superiority. We read about such in the Epistle of James. It is like Adam rejoicing over the cloth of skin. He may have a justification. It was given to him by God. Many Christians proudly tell testimonies about their wealth and health when they come together on the first day of the week. This is Adamic syndrome. They are willing to forget about the Lord’s Table and partaking of the Lord’s Supper. They leave it as an option according to the convenience of their pastor, if not once a month. We are asked to remember the Lord’s death by partaking of the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week. That is a minimum requirement, in the Word of God. They consider it as a maximum requirement. Making the minimum requirement as the maximum requirement is well pleasing to the enemy and not to God. Our corporate worship must be in accordance with God’s revelation of His mind and will. We have no authority to change that. We read that the Pharisee and the tax collector went into the temple to pray (Luke 18:9-14). The Pharisee lifted up his unholy hands and prayed. He did not fall down before God. That gave him plenty of opportunity to look around and compare him with the tax collector and to tell God how different he was from that man, especially in morality. The law required fasting only once a year (Leviticus 16:29; Numbers 29:7). During the time of Prophet Zechariah this was changed to four times a year (Zechariah 8:19). Now this Pharisee reminded God that he does it twice a week, much more than the law and the fathers required of him. He reminded God how rich and generous he was to give tithe in everything. The law required tithes only from corn, wine, oil, and cattle (Leviticus 27:30-32; Deuteronomy 12:6, 11, 17; 14:22-23 compared with Matthew 23:23). On the other

52

hand the tax collector fall down before God. He could not lift his head. He told God how low He was. He asked for God’s grace. He thanked God for the opportunity to come before Him. Both the Pharisee and tax collector came together to pray. They came together from a place where they are separated by their life and work. They separated at the temple. They separated where they should be together and not to be separated. They separated themselves at the place they thought the presence of God was. These two came together from where they were separated and they separated themselves at a place where they should not be separated. This is the problem of worship of mixed multitude. In these days, many are lifting up their unholy hands like the Pharisee on the first day of the week. They think that self-exultation is more important than obedience and remembering the Lord’s death till He come. They are proud to compare themselves with others before God. They are ready to remind God about what they did for Him. But we come together from the world, were we are separated by our works as the Pharisee and the tax collector, to worship corporeally by remembering the death of the Son of God for us. We should not debar those who are accepted in the Beloved. We should not remove the truth that is given by God in His word. If we do, then it will be similar to a man flying a jumbo jet flying without a compass or a rudder in the open sky. Without the compass or the Global Positioning System (GPS) he does not have any knowledge about the direction of his going. All he knows is that he is going in the direction of the nosecone of the plane. He has no rudder to change the course. He is able to withstand the forces of nature to certain extent as long as he has some fuel and the plane is functioning properly. He is at the mercy of variable wind and the force of gravity. He is a sport of the nature. It drives him into the fierce urge of demon worship, if not to change the word of God to please the imaginations of his fallible mind. He is filled with fear of mountain ranges that may be hidden in the clouds. One may ask, why did this man tried to fly this plane. Instead, the question should be; how did he begin his flight in a plane without a guidance system and rudder? The answer is simple. Satan plays with man’s intellect when man tries to play with God’s word. The Nature of Worship: Is It Formal or Informal? We read and hear about formal and informal worship. What is a formal worship? According to the use of the word “formal” in this world, it means: Relating to the outward aspect of something; being or related to essential form; adhering to the accepted forms or conventions; having the outward appearance but lacking substance. If we consider the formal in any of these senses, then we also have to consider who defines or establish the formality of worship. Is it the worshippers who establish the formality of worship? Or, is it the One who is worshipped establishes the formality of worship? It is the king who establishes the rules regarding how his subjects should come before him and it is not the subjects. The subjects should come in accordance with the rules established by the king and do homage, bowing their knees, to the king. If this is so among humans, how much more it should be before God. In the Old Testament the law required the formality of worship. Therefore, it was formal. When the shepherds came to see the babe in the manger, they worshipped as required. When the wise men came to see the King that was born, they fell at His feet and worshipped. The demons fell before Him. The twenty-four elders fell before him. We must fall before Him who is God when we worship God. The formality is given in the Word of God. There is no informal worship we read about in the scriptures. God demands a form of Worship and we are not His equal to change that requirement. If any one thinks so, then he/she is equating himself/herself equal or greater than God. In the Old Testament the worship the children of Israel was not to worship any other gods (Exodus 34:14; Deuteronomy 11:16)). We are also not to worship other gods or even to sit at the demons table (1 Corinthians 10:29-31). Worship Jehovah in the beauty of His holiness (1 Chronicles 16:29); Psalm 29:2; 96:9). The children of Israel worshiped in the city of Jerusalem, yearly (1 Samuel 1:3; Acts 8:27; 24:11). When away from Jerusalem or in Jerusalem, they worshipped Jehovah turning towards the temple (Psalm 5:7). Daniel prayed daily turning towards Jerusalem. We are to worship the Father in spirit and truth (John 4:23; Philippians 3:3). An unbeliever

53

is to worship God falling on his face (1 Corinthians 14:25). We also read about the assembly gathering in houses and also in one place. Paul met Lydia on the river side, when they came to pray. There was worship also in upper rooms. As the individual Christians are temple, our individual worship is in the temple, which is to be formal. The Assembly is also called the house of God. Therefore, the corporate worship is also need to be formal. When we worship God in spirit and truth, then we must bend our knees spiritually before God. It must be more than a physical action. Worship in truth is not as we conceive in the folly of our fallible brain, but it must be according as prescribed in the Word of God as revealed to us and must be in Christ, who is the Truth. Our personal and corporate worship must be formal and it is to be in spirit and truth. Our worship – personal, family, and corporeal - should be in accordance with the Word of God, in spirit and truth. The Father seeks such.

54

Chapter IX

Head-covering We read about the head-covering of woman when praying or prophesying in between the teachings of the Lord’s Table and the Lord ’s Supper. The absence of a discussion of the subject of head-covering for woman when praying or prophesying in connection with the Lord’s Table and Lord’s supper will violate the principle of studying the Word of God as cutting it in a straight line (2 Timothy 2:15). Therefore I am including the subject of head-covering. The Head-covering for Woman When Praying or Prophesying: I Corinthians 11:4-5, “Every man praying or prophesying, having [anything] on his head, put his head to shame. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered puts her own head to shame; for it is one and the same as a shaved [woman].” The context of this passage is “Be ye imitators, even as I also [am] of Christ.” (1 Corinthians 11:1). To those imitators of Christ, the headship of God is shown as: the head of woman is man, the head of man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God. 1 Corinthians 11:6 onwards we read about the importance of a woman’s hair. It is on her head as her glory. While man’s head is Christ, woman’s head is man. Therefore, woman’s hair represents ‘man in his glory.’ No man can approach God in his glory, except through Christ. Therefore, a woman sitting with her head covered reminds man that it is not in ‘his glory,’ but by Christ, who is his head; he is coming before the throne of grace. Woman covering her head while praying is a symbol of man’s position before God. 1 Corinthians 11:6 states that if a woman cast away the covering demanded by the law of God, she must also cast away likewise what is appointed by nature. To go beyond the limits of nature and the laws of God is not progress, but it is diminution. If a woman discards the covering, which is the symbol of her position, she may as well discard that which the nature has given. A man is not to cover his head while praying or prophesying. Angels do not transgress because of man’s head, which is Christ. WOMAN is not by nature a name of WIFE, but ‘wife’ by condition a name of ‘woman.’ Therefore, womanhood is predicated apart from wifehood, and not vis-à-vis, because it cannot even exist. The importance of woman covering her head from its context does not allow any questioning of this practice. The Corinthians, as Greeks, started not to cover their women’s heads while covering men’s head may be the reason this doctrinal injunction is placed just before the Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:17-34) and after the table of demons. To the Grecians it was customary to grow their hair and beard as a token of devotion to any study. This is similar to the practices of Hindu Maharishi’s, Ayyappan seva, etc. (From the context, it is clear that the preceding portions of this epistle leading up to this deal with practices at Corinth that needed to be corrected. A few of them were: fornication, divorce, remarriage, participating at demon’s table, etc.). I Corinthians 11:6 imply that some at Corinth obeyed while some others didn’t. The headship of man does not imply superiority of one or the inferiority of the other as claimed by agnostics and atheists. If the agnostics and atheists were correct in their assertions, then MASTERS AND SLAVES should have been the subject in 1 Corinthians 11:1-16. But it is woman as wife free and equal with man, as Son to the Father. Woman’s head is man as the Son’s head is the Father. The Son was obedient to the Father. The

55

Father begat the Son not as a slave, but begat Him free as a COUNSELOR. The woman was not subjected to Adam as soon as she was created. She did not hear such a thing when she was brought to Adam. Adam said that she was bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh. That is, she was ‘equal’ but separate in relation to Adam. The subjection came after the fall, after she was deceived (1 Timothy 2:14). The woman’s turning was towards her husband and not to the serpent. Disobedience is an act of will (head) and not emotional (heart). Christ as the head of man makes the disobedience of man His (1 Corinthians 11:3; 2 Corinthians 5:21). Similarly, the disobedience of woman makes it that of man, as her head. The custom of the first century was that harlots did not cover their heads, while those who did not practice that activity covered their head. The recent phenomena of teaching about the inappropriateness of head covering for woman are by those who are dedicated to disobey God’s command. Disobeying the scripture to worship God is not the way to worship God. It is the way of Cain and not that of Abel. Let me answer them from 1 Corinthians 11:16, “But if any one think to be contentious, we have no such customs, nor the assemblies of God.” We have no custom to justify contentious people disobeying the word of God. Are we supposed to say after Israel, “… that we may be like all the nations …” (1 Samuel 8:20)? Why the Holy Spirit brought the question of Divine hierarchy and long hair as well as covering of hair ‘bread’ and ‘cup’ in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11? In 1 Corinthians 10 it was dealing with the tables of demons in relation to the Lord’s Table. What was practiced at the demon’s table is not to be practiced at the Lord’s Table. The Manner of Head-covering for Woman When Praying or Prophesying: Let me try to answer your concern about the manner of covering the head of the woman. My previous posting was a general treatment of this subject in its scope and nature. As you are concerned about the type or manner of the covering, I need to go deeper than I did before. First, about the “Covering of Head” that you are referred to 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. The word ‘covering’ or ‘uncovered’ appear in verses 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, and 15. If we look into the original, different Greek words are used in these verses. In verses 4, the Greek phrase is κατα καφαλεs εχω (KATA KEFALES EXO), which means “to have on the head.” In verses 6 and 7, the Greek word is κατακαλυπτω (KATAKALUPTO), which means, “to cover up” or “to cover fully.” In verses 5 and 13, the Greek word is ακατακαλυπτω (AKATAKALUPTO), which means, “uncovered.” In verse 15, the Greek word is περιβολαιον (PERIBOLAION), which means, “Something cast around,” as in Genesis 24:65 (LXX). In these four expressions, I believe that you were concerned about κατακαλυπτω (KATAKALUPTO). This Greek word is a combination of κατα (KATA) and καλυπτω (KALUPTO). Καλυπτω (KALUPTO) means ‘to cover’ as seen in Matthew 8:24; 10:26; Luke 8:16; 23:30; 2 Corinthians 4:3, James 5:20; and 1 Peter 4:8. In all these verses the Greek word κατακαλυπτω (KATAKALUPTO) is used as a verb and not as a noun. The Greek word κατα (KATA) could be translated differently as: ‘against’ (117 times); ‘according to’ (108 times); ‘in’ (35 times); ‘by’ (27 times), and so on. Therefore, it is safe to assume that when it is used as κατακαλυπτω (KATAKALUPTO) in 1 Corinthians 11, it means ‘to cover up,’ or ‘to cover fully.’ This is different from a person covering his/her body by clothing. When we read the Greek word καλυπτω (KALUPTO) for the first time in Matthew 8:24, it was in reference to water covering the ship. Could one see the part of the ship that was covered by water? Was it a continuous covering? It may be. It may not be. When a ship is tossed by the wind and if a person say that the ship is covered with water, it does not mean that the parts of the ship is not visible. But it means, in a general sense, that the ship is covered with water. Now, let us look into the word, κατακαλυπτω (KATAKALUPTO). It means the covering is a full covering and not a partial one. My understanding is that it refers to the whole head to be covered. This is not by a ribbon or by any means that becomes a part of the head. What do I mean by ‘part of the head?’ It is not the front, the back, the middle, the side, and so on. Whatever method is used, it should be over all the head.

56

In 1 Corinthian 11:4 we read in KJV, “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.” It should be translated as “… having down over (his) head…” or “… having anything on his head…” There is no Greek word to translate as “covered” in the Greek, but the translators of KJV decided to insert it. In its literal sense, men are not to have anything of his head while praying or prophesying. In 11:5 we read about “uncovered” and the Greek word is ακατακαλυπτω (AKATAKALUPTO) and this is in connection with woman. We should not overlook 1 Corinthians 11:14-15. In verse 14 we read that if a man has long hair it is dishonor to him. At the same time we read in verse 15 that the long hair is the glory of the woman and it is given to her in lieu of a veil. Again the headship is brought into our focus. Earlier we learned that the woman’s head is man and man’s head is Christ, and Christ’s head is God. In verse 15 we read that the hair of the woman is her glory which is on her head. Spiritually, that glory is man’s glory, since man is the woman’s head and the hair that is on the woman’s head is her glory. When we come together as the body of Christ, man is not expected to glory in man’s glory. We praise God in our thanksgiving and worship exalting the head of the Assembly, Christ. Man should not cover Christ, his head. But woman should cover her head to signify to the unlearned, visitors, angels who look in awe, as well as many untold number of Satan’s angels that are looking on that man’s glory has no place in our worship and praising God. All is only because of our Lord Jesus Christ. When a man gets up and give out a hymn, pray, or read scriptures then he is reminded about his personal unworthiness and the privileges extended to him by God through the Son by observing the covered heads of women. The Son is glorified as the head of the assembled believers. We glory only in Him. From 1 Corinthians 11:15 we learn that God gave to woman the hair as a veil. The Greek expression is περιβολαιον (PERIBOLAION, means ‘instead of a veil’). In KJV, it is translated as ‘covering.’ This creates some confusion in our minds when we read 1 Corinthians 11:1-16. In Greek περι (PERI) means around as in the English word ‘perimeter.’ Βολαιον (BOLAION) is from βολη (BOLE) to mean ‘cast around,’ therefore it is as a veil. In LXX we see the same word in Genesis 24:65 when Rebekah took a veil and covered herself when she saw Isaac. Rebekah took the veil and cast it around her. This is not the expression in the previous verses about covering of the woman’s head while praying of prophesying. A veil is what is cast around the body to cover it. The woman is not to cover her head with something cast around as a veil. She is to cover her head to symbolically tell that we, the assembled, are approaching the Father to praise Him and worship Him only in the Son. When the Father looks, I speak in human terms, at the assembled He sees only the Son who as Christ is the Head of the Assembly. Women reminds us our unworthiness and men declare the privileges of being the children of God (John 1:12-13) fully magnifying the Christ with uncovered head. What a meaningful and beautiful testimony to all those who are observing us, especially the angels who are not given this privilege. This covering has nothing to do with the women, but have everything to do with man. We should never approach God in our glory of education, earthly knowledge, position in this world, etc. We approach God only in the Son, accepting and magnifying Him as our glory that we received from God on the Day of Pentecost when the body was formed on this earth and united with its glorified Head that is in heaven, who is at the right hand of the Father. We should never make the head covering of the woman what it is not and what it should not be. The purpose of covering the head of a woman in praying (speaking to God) and prophesying (speaking about the will and mind of God to others) is in connection with the headship of Christ in the local assembling of the saints. From 1 Corinthians 14:35 we learn that this speaking and prophesying were not allowed for a woman when men are present. From 1 Corinthians 11 we learn that when men are present, the head of the woman is present and the doctrine of headship is to follow. There we also read that the head of Christ is God. Why the Holy Spirit brought the question of Divine hierarchy and long hair as well as covering of hair ‘bread’ and ‘cup’ in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11? In 1 Corinthians 10 it was dealing with the tables of demons in relation to the Lord’s Table. What was practiced at the demon’s table is not to be practiced at the Lord’s Table. At the Lord’s Table we eat the Lord’s Supper. The Bride (the Assembly or the Church) is covered and the

57

angels wonder because they do not see the beauty of the Bride. Such a beautiful truth should be cherished and obeyed, while we can. (Note: When I was young, Dr. A.P. Mathew tried to teach me this truth, as I explained above. Being young, I failed to grasp it. Later his efforts helped me to come to the realization of it.) Most of the denominations, including Pentecostals, have very serious errors in their teachings related to headship. They do not hold the headship of Christ in their gathering. They may say that they do, but they don’t. They do not hold the priesthood of believers. They may say that they hold this, but they don’t. This they demonstrate by the appointment of Pastors, who acts as the local head of that church. They do not hold the New Testament teaching of the mutually exclusive nature of the local assembly while they are united in Christ as one in the Assembly that He builds. They have an organizational hierarchy. They do have a pastor (or pastors under one pastor) who directs and conduct their gathering together in one place. This pastor acts as the head of the local assembly, thus replacing the headship of Christ. The pastor and the group of pastors under him act as priests in their gatherings. They claim that pastors are those who serve God. We have already seen that these pastors have replaced the headship of Christ with them as the head of the local church. In Hebrew 12:28 we read, “Wherefore let us, receiving a kingdom not to be shaken, have grace, by which let us serve God acceptably with reverence and fear?” We are told that the serving of God must be with a godly fear. Similar passages can be seen in Deuteronomy 28:58; Psalm 111:9; and Malachi 1:14. Unfortunately, these pastors who change the Word of God according to their desires also equate themselves with God without godly fear. They insist to be called ‘Reverend,’ while the Word of God tells us that only God’s name is to be reverenced. These days even the Pentecostal pastors of Indian origin insist on being called “Reverend Pastor.” [Note: For the lighter side: Let me write a story from my life. In the 1970s I used to meet with a Pastor and his name was David L. Whenever I addressed him as David, he used to tell me that he is a Pastor. In return, I used to tell him that I knew that that he is a Pastor of a Church, but kept on addressing him as David. At last, with a stern face he told me that I should address him as ‘Reverend David.’ To this I replied that he is not my Pastor. Then I added that in the future he should call me Saint George (Note: This is not the Saint George of Scotland), because it was God who called me so. Well, I leave the rest to your imagination.] All denominations, including Pentecostals, have a hierarchy that ends up in a national or international headquarter. This is alien to the scriptures. They think and teach that they are building their church. Sometimes, they establish a quota for a year or a five-year period. An example is in 1990s IPC had a quota to increase their number of churches by a certain number within a short period of time. By doing so, they claim that they had the authority to establish their churches and not God. It is they who say that the Word of God is not perfect and should be changed according to the man made customs. They find excuses. Knowing this, the Holy Spirit inspired Apostle Paul to write, “But if any one thinks to be contentious, we have no such custom, not the assemblies of God.” (1 Corinthians 11:16) The “thinking of being contentious” is connected with “Ye keep the directions” (‘ordinances’ in KJV) in 1 Corinthians 11:2. This head covering is one of the directions or ordinances that we read after that verse. It is this direction or ordinance that is told as insignificant to be changed. They refuse to read this verse, while eagerly abolishing what was required of God. We read in 1 Corinthians 11:16 that we have no custom to change the Word of God according to the custom of this world. The Reasons for Head-covering for Woman When Praying or Prophesying: In 1 Corinthians 11:3 we read about eh ‘head of the woman,’ ‘the head of man,’ and ‘the head of Christ.’ We also read that Peter was leading his wife as he was laboring for the Lord (1 Corinthians 9:5). The Greek word for ‘to lead about’ is PERIAGO from AGO, means ‘to lead.’ Therefore, 1 Corinthians 9:5 tells us that Peter was leading his wife around as a companion. We do not read about this leading in 1 Corinthians 11:5. The Greek word for ‘head’ is KAPHALE from KAPTO, meaning ‘seizing.’ That is why I consider it as dealing

58

with man’s behavior of seizing the head when in distress or confused as more apt. There are two pairs of ‘heads’ in 1 Corinthians 11:4 and 5. Man reaches for his head at such instances of being confused or distressed to show how important is his head to him. By doing so, man is trying to cover his head. If we consider this action of man, then we could say that the head of the woman and the head of man are physical. The Holy Spirit is using a physical action of man to teach him a spiritual lesson. The existence of teachers of unlimited freedom is implied in 1 Corinthians 11:3 through 16. Man is said to be the head of the woman. We also read that the long hair is the glory of the woman. The woman’s glory is on her head, spiritually her man. The woman’s glory belongs to her man alone. This is similar to the glory of the Assembly, the Bride of Christ, belongs only to Christ. The covering of the head of the woman in an assembly gathering helps to avoid unlawful excitement in such a gathering. This should not happen when the Assembly is declaring the death of the Lord before men, before angels, and over and above before the Father. This is a solemn occasion, it is so solemn that the Father is delighted in this action of His children, the angels wonder about it because they cannot do it, and Satan and his angels are busying to disrupt it. Our women, not limited to wives, sit beside us reminding us of our place before Christ by covering their heads while men uphold their heads, the Lord Jesus Christ. I believe that we should read 1 Corinthians 11:3 and Ephesians 5:20-33 together. The covering of the head of the woman and men are mentioned in connection with praying and prophesying. Prayer is an action of man’s will and power, while prophecy is an act of man derived from God’s will and power. If we consider this aspect of prayer and prophecy, then we will tend to favor that the covering of the head is applicable at all aspects of our activity. The minimum requirement is given to us in the Word of God is in connection with praying and prophesying and is placed between scriptures dealing with the Lord’s Table and Lord’s Supper. That is the action required of those who assemble in one place (1 Corinthians 11:20) as children of God and called saints by God. Thus we see that there are two minimum requirements in connection with the Lord’s Supper. The first is that the woman should cover her head and the man should not cover his head. The other is that all believers in a locality should gather together into one place around the Lord’s Table to eat the Lord’s Supper. What God has revealed as the minimum requirement should not be made the maximum requirements by us. All that is contrary to God’s requirements dishonors God. As God is the head of Christ and Christ is the head of man, when man dishonors his head, he is actually dishonors God. The immediate dishonor is done to Christ and as Christ is being dishonored; His head is also dishonored by our actions. Remember, the way the Roman soldiers dishonored Christ. They mocked him by placing a royal colored robe, a crown of thorn over his head and made sure that it was in its place by beating on it as hard as they could, placed a rod in his hand as the emblem of authority – a scepter, and then they mocked him by uttering certain words. They did dishonor the head of Christ by placing a crown of thorns. We may say that it reflected dishonoring God. In 1 Corinthians 11:3 we also see a successive progression of headship. Apostle Paul referred to it in 1 Corinthians 1:10-13 and 3:21-23. We also read that the divisions existed when they were gathered together to eat the Lord’s Supper at the Lord’s Table (11:17-20). In Corinth the followers were glorifying in their leaders, even at the Lord’s Table. They were not glorifying Christ, the head of the Assembly. Therefore, they were told that there is a hierarchy of headship and that is from God down ward through Christ and ends in man being the head of the woman. We should not be glorifying the other direction. When a woman uncovers her head in the gathering of the Assembly, are we creating a ‘head’ that does not exist in the Assembly? Woman’s ‘head’ is man and his ‘head’ is Christ. Man’s ‘head’ is not covered and woman’s ‘head’ is to be covered. When that woman’s ‘head’ is not covered, there is an additional ‘head’ is to be seen. There is some additional ‘head’ that is equal in glory with that of man’s. In the gathering of the saints in an Assembly, the glorifying ends in God through Christ. We should not make this as the Father, it is said that the head of Christ is God (THEOS). We sometime may replace God with the Father, but that is not what God has revealed. In 1 Corinthians 11:3 we read, “… The Christ is the head of every man…” The expression “every” indicates individuals and not to be collective. We also should remember that Adam is the head of every man that is born according to the laws of nature. Christ is the head of every man that is born of God. The Greek

59

word for “man” in 1 Corinthians 11:3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 14 is ANER, meaning ‘male.’ The Greek word translated as “man” in 11:28; 13:1; 14:1, 2; 15:19, 21, 39, 45, 47 is ANThROPOS, meaning ‘human’ including man and woman. Women are not forbidden in speaking in gatherings other than that of the Assembly. We read about the daughters of Philip, seven of them, who prophesied (Acts 21). In Acts 18:21-28 we read that Aquila and Priscilla took Apollos to their home and opened the way of God more exactly to him. In obedience to the scriptures (1 Timothy 2:12), we could conclude that it was Aquila who did opened the way of God to Apollos. The direction given by Apostle Paul is “Let your women be silent in the assemblies, for it is not permitted to them to speak ... for it is shame for a woman to speak in assembly.” (1 Corinthians 14:34-35) If we look into the context of this injunction, we come to realize that it is against the practice in the Assembly at Corinth that women spoke claiming to have the gift of tongues and prophecy. They were told to be silent and cover their head in the gathering of the Assembly. It is a shame that the Pentecostals and Charisma tics deny this direction from God, delivered through Apostle Paul, and encourage women to speak in their gathering. They allow and encourage woman to do what is shame, according to God. This they do in the name of Christ claiming to have a second baptism of the Holy Spirit and a permanent filling of the Holy Spirit. The claim of having both these is unscriptural. Those who hold unscriptural teaching about the Holy Spirit also overrules the directions given by the Holy Spirit. That aspect of their action makes sense as being rebellious to the Word of God and having itching ears they go after alien doctrines (2 Timothy 4:3-4). In the word of God, there are two things forbidden to woman. They are; speaking in the Assembly of saints and teaching men. We do not read any direction from God against singing by women. On the contrary both men and women are asked to make melodies in our hearts (Ephesians 5:19). Men and women are at liberty to sing hymns when the congregation is singing praises to the Father and the Son. Women are also allowed by the scriptures to say “Amen” at the end of each prayer that is offered to the Father and the Son. Those who rebel against the directions from God that women should not speak in the assembly and teach men use the singing and saying “Amen” at the end of each prayer as a rhetorical point of argument to silence many who wants to follow the Word of God. They are trying to intimidate the followers of Paul as he was of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1), by their rhetoric and fallible logics. We should not be ashamed of being the followers of Paul as he was of Christ by obeying the directions given for us to follow as given in His word. Let us read all directions from God that is in the Word of God as it is written. Without stopping after reading those directions, let us also follow them exactly as we read. Woman who is not the ‘head’ of any covers her head in the assembly while praying or prophesying indicates that we are not self-exalting ourselves, but we are exalting Christ – the ‘head’ of man with uncovered head. One may be able to show that the ‘head’ in verse 5 may have a connotation to ‘leadership.’ When we read these verses in the context of being in between the Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper, I fail to consider the ‘head’ of man as dealing with his leadership. Not only that, if we follow this path of reasoning, the ‘woman’s head’ in verse 4 should be about the woman’s leadership. Therefore, I set that explanation aside. Men were entrusted with speaking, teaching, praying, prophesying, governing in the Assembly, etc. While both male and female were entrusted with many other ministries. This included prophesying and praying in other places and not in the gathering of the saints in the Assembly. Man’s responsibility in the Assembly was not something that is to be covered up in the gathering of the Assembly. Where that of the woman was to be covered and is symbolically indicated by the expression of a veil. The expression “dishonors his head” could be taken as physical dishonor, as well as dishonoring Christ. Similarly, the expression, “dishonors her head,” could also be considered to indicate dishonoring her head, as well as dishonoring that of man’s. We read about shaving or the hair being cut off from the woman in 1 Corinthians 11:6. During the first century, this was a punishment for the adulterous women. It was also a common practice of the Adulteress to

60

uncover their head as opposed to be covered by other women of the society. Therefore, the Holy Spirit tells that those who want to imitate the rebellious and adulterous women of this world by uncovering their head should also face the consequence prescribed by the world. That is, to shave their hair. When the demand to face the consequence is placed, man and woman have a tendency to exhibit the Cain Syndrome, “The penalty is too much for me to bear.” In addition to this, there may be a reference to Numbers 5:18 and Deuteronomy 21:12. In Numbers 5 we read that the priest should uncover the head of the woman who is accused of unfaithfulness and have committed trespass against her husband. There the dealing with adultery starts with uncovering the head of the woman. In Deuteronomy 21 the shaving of the head is demanded of a woman that is taken in war and an Israelite wants to marry her. She has to shed all her previous glory before the Israelite could take her as his wife. This act is considered as a shameful one to the captive, who is proud of her heritage and nation. Dishonor and shamelessness are exhibited by this rebellious act by a woman. In this verse we also read about what woman has as given by nature. When the word ‘nature’ is in the scriptures, it has a connotation to the physical aspect and not the spiritual. Woman is asked to cover what man doesn’t have by nature. Wearing hair is different from owning the truth. Therefore by covering of the head also implies displaying of the woman’s physical glory and beauty. We are told about the creation of Man and Woman on the sixth day. Man was created in the image and glory of God. Woman was created in man’s glory. The scripture in 1 Corinthians 11:7 is silent about the image after which the woman was created. When we read Genesis 1, we learn that dominion was the chief property of being in the image of God. In Philippians 2 we read that when the Son came into this world He emptied the glory that He had with the Father before the foundation of this world and took the form of a servant. While on this earth, the Lord Jesus Christ repeatedly asked the Father to glorify Him. He did not ask for power, because He always said that He had the power. When the children of God are gathered together, there the man represents the Son with His glory having His image, while the woman represents His ministry on earth that made our salvation possible by emptying His glory and taking the form of man. Therefore, we should not glorify the man’s glory in our assembling, but should exalt Christ in His glory that he has with the Father from eternity. Christ is man’s head. He should not cover Christ; when praying or prophesying. Praying is God-ward form man and prophesying is man-ward from God. From Genesis 1 & 2 we learn that woman is the symbol of man’s dependence. Woman was created with the fact of a need of man. Therefore woman ought to have authority over her head. This authority over her head, the man, is showed by covering her ‘head,’ the man. This covering of the head of woman is done by the woman who has authority over her head. When submitting to man in the authority of the Word of god, she is administering her authority by covering her head. The equality of man and woman is taught in the Word of God as required by God. When woman covers her head it is a symbolical admission that man is not independent to approach God. In the gathering of the saints in the Assembly we are to glorify God – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This glorification should be patterned after God. The Holy Spirit glorifies the Son through the saints and the Son glorifies the Father. Similarly, the woman glorifies the man and the man in turn glorifies the Son and the Son glorifies the Father. In 1 Corinthians 11:10 we read about the sign of authority. This authority is related to the angels. The expression is “on account of the angels.” Angels did witness the creation of man and woman. They also witnessed the fall of man. They also witnessed the man and woman being driven away from the Garden of God. They are always witnesses and ministering spirits of God’s works. They are wondering about the love of God to this bunch of idiotic people who are always interested to disobey Him and to obey the enemy - Satan. But God loves them to the extent of giving His only begotten Son so that we could have eternal life. Now those who are saved and called to be the children of God are encouraging to be rebellious to approach God in man’s glory. This is done by following the custom of those who live in adultery. When we come together into one place as God’s children do we accept the authority of God? That authority rests and comes from the ‘head.’ Is

61

that ‘head’ the man or Christ? If it is man, then woman should not cover her head. If it is Christ, then woman should cover her head and man should not cover his head. Christ always glorifies God. From 1 Corinthians 11:16 we learn that there were some in Corinth who asserted a greater degree of unscriptural freedom in Christ. Similar claims of freedom or liberty by many were claimed throughout the Church history. To such God has provided a statement for us to repeat, “But if any one think to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the assemblies of God.” This ‘contentious’ behavior is in opposition to the ‘directions’ (‘delivered’ – KJV) that are mentioned in verse 2. If you ask me to restate it as I understand, then this is what I understand, “If anyone disagrees with the headship of Christ and His directions regarding the head-covering and speaking of woman in the Assembly, let that person withdraw from the Assembly, the customs and directions from God cannot be changed.”

62

APPENDIX

63

APPENDIX Some questions Asked in connection with the Lord’s Supper: The following questions and answers appeared in KeralaBrethren Forum and/or BrethrenIndia forum. Question: Last Sunday in out Bible Study at the assembly in reference to the Lord’s Supper, someone said that if the number of members are huge, say 400, 800 or even 1000, then its practical and convenient to use have different breads and wine, (e.g. each group of 50 people may have 1 bread and one cup)...so there are several breads and glasses used, instead of what we have 1 bread and 1 cup. He added that several assemblies in south India is supposed to have chosen this mode, as its not possible for a huge group to take part from the same bread and cup. So my question is, is it ok if the assembly uses more than one bread and cup at the Lord’s Supper? And also how big can an assembly be? Does the Scripture actually have something to say or hint? Answer: In the Gospels we read about the institution of the Lord’s Supper and it was on the night in which He was betrayed. In Acts 2:42-47 we read how the Lord’s Supper was practiced by the early years of the Assembly under the teaching of the apostles. In Acts 20 along with 1 Corinthians 16 we read about the day of observation as a minimum requirement. In 1 Corinthians 10 and 11 we learn the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. On that Day of Pentecost 3,000 souls were added to the Assembly. “They persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers. … and breaking of bread in the house, they received their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, …” Because of the later phrase, it is generally taught that the “breaking of bread” in Acts 2:46 is in connection with eating food. Is that true? In Acts 12 we read that many were gathered together at the house of Mary to pray. Does this mean that the “prayer” mentioned in Acts 2:42 was in houses? If so, the “breaking of bread” could be also in houses. In 1 Corinthians 10 we read about the doctrine regarding the Lord’s Table. It shows the oneness of the body of Christ, the Assembly. As being one body, there is one bread and one cup to eat and drink at the Lord’s Supper. In 1 Corinthians 11 we read about another aspect of the Lord’s Supper. In 1 Corinthians 11:18 we read about all the members of the local assembly is to gather together to break bread. This aspect of the Lord’s Supper make us to interpret Acts 2:47 strictly related to eating food. But if we take Acts 2 along with 12 and 1 Corinthians 10 and 11 we could realize that the requirement of ONE BREAD and ONE CUP was maintained in Jerusalem by gathering in the houses, when the members were more than 3,000 in number. In Jerusalem, they divided the members into smaller groups to meet at different houses to break bread and prayer. While they gathered in houses they also ate food (Acts 2:47). From the scriptures, it becomes clear that our gathering to break bread could be as big as that can be accommodated by the size of the ONE BREAD. This also helps us to understand our Lord’s saying in Luke 12:32, when He called us “little flock.” The definition of the ‘local assembly’ could be defined by the assigned geographical boundaries to gather. But all those who are in that geographical location must gather at the same place to break bread. This is what I learned from the scriptures. Question: you had said that “From the scriptures, it becomes clear that our gathering to break bread could be as big as that can be accommodated by the size of the ONE BREAD.” You also said, “But all those who are in that geographical location must gather at the same place to break bread.” Is it that people should gather

64

together in the same assembly hall, or in different small groups for maintaining the breaking of one bread and one cup? Answer: From Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 11:18; and 16:2 we learn that the saints are to gather together to break bread. This is the scriptural mandated and observed in the 1st century. That means that we are to gather together as the local body to break bread on the first day of the week. Breaking bread in remembrance of the death of the Lord should be the primary activity of our gathering on the first day of the week. It need not be in a ‘Gospel Hall,’ but could be in a convenient place. If a Gospel Hall is convenient, then let that be so. Unfortunately, there are a lot of members of the body of Christ, believers, who wants to gather together not to break bread, as the Corinthian Christians did (1 Corinthians 11:18). We cannot make them to come to the place where we gather together to break bread as commanded by Christ our Lord. We can point this fact and requirement from the scriptures to them. If they won’t gather to break bread as believers, but want to gather together as Pentecostals or Presbyterians or under some other name, we are helpless. We should gather together UNTO HIS NAME and all saints are to be welcomed to join. This is not a denominational act; it is remembering the death of the Lord till He comes. Each one of us is responsible for our action. Many Christians are gathering unto their man-made names (Pentecostal, Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, etc.). They love that name more than the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. (It is unto His name we are asked to gather together.) This should not deter us from gathering UNTO HIS NAME (Matthew 18:20). Those who are gathering unto other names are gathering to sing and to hear others singing to others, and to preach and to hear others preaching to others. That is not what we have in the scriptures. Singing and preaching are secondary. Breaking of bread is the primary objective of gathering UNTO HISNAME. We should not be confused when others don’t want to announce the death of the Lord till he come (1 Corinthians 11:26) before the Father. A similar situation happened when our Lord was on this earth. We read this in Luke 6:49-50. The Lord did not ask His disciples to join those who cast out demons in His name, but refused to be with Him. He asked John to leave them alone. It was their responsibility to be with Him and not the responsibility of the disciples to compel them to be with Him. Let us do what we are told by the Lord Jesus Christ to do according to the scriptures. Let us gather together UNTO HIS NAME to break bread in remembrance of His death till He come. Question: I was reading an Emmaus Correspondence book on the Lord’s Supper. As I was reading different portions of the Gospels describing the Lord’s Supper, I found it a bit difficult to understand the narration in the Gospel of Luke, where after the Lord’s Supper is instituted, the Lord had said: 21 But behold, the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table. 22 For the Son of Man goes as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed!” 23 And they began to question one another, which of them it could be who was going to do this.(ESV Bible Online) How come it’s like this? I understood from the Gospel of John that Judas was not there during the Lord’s Supper, having accepted the “sop”, and the Satan having entered him, he left. But my question is, the Holy Spirit had guided the Gospel writer to write in this order, isn’t it? Why is it like this then? I don’t question the inspiration or question the work of the Holy Spirit, but I want to understand how it is like this? Answer: The ‘sop’ is the bitter herbs that the children of Israel were to have as part of the Passover feast. In the Passover feast there will be four cups of wine and three Matzos. The father takes the middle, not the first or the last but the middle, Matzo and breaks it into two. He wraps one half in a napkin and hides it behind a pillow behind him. This is done as a symbol of dead and buried. Our Lord mentioned about His impending betrayal and death at this time to the disciples. Then the father will remove the shank bone and lift the plate with Matzo and all will recite a traditional passage.

65

The first cup, “the cup of thanksgiving,’ is shared by all at this time. We read about this cup in Luke 22:17. After the first cup, there are four traditional questions to be asked and answered. This is about the history of the Jewish people, especially in Egypt. During this time the ten plagues are also mentioned. At that time, everyone will dip his/her finger in the second cup and let a drop spill on the bitter herbs. They eat the bitter herbs, depicting the slavery and suffering in Egypt. We read about this in John 13:26 as ‘sop.’ We do not read about this ‘sop’ in Luke 22:19-20. The dismissal of Judas from the table is not mentioned in Luke, also. At this time they will have the supper. After the supper is over, the third cup is shared among all. This cup is called “the cup of blessing.” We read about this cup in 1 Corinthians 10:16 and also in 1 Corinthians 11:23-32. This cup is referred to in the Old Testament. In Psalm 116:13 as “the cup of salvation.” In Jeremiah 31:31-32, as “new covenant.” We read about this in Matthew 26:26-29 and also in Hebrews 6:6-13. After this the father will take the hidden piece of the middle Matzo and will be shared among those who are at the table. This piece of Matzo is called AFOKOMEN, meaning desert. No food is allowed after this. The other half of the middle Matzo will be preserved and brought back next year, implying an everlasting memorial. We read about this in Zech. 12:10; 13:6; Acts 1:11. Its corresponding verses could be found in Acts 1:11 and Galatians 4:9. The fourth cup was for Elijah. The father will go to the front door and look outside and say that Elijah did not come. This concludes the Passover Supper. The institution of the Lord’s Supper took place after the supper and during the sharing of the third cup, the cup of blessing. Question: Thanks for your explanation regarding the sop and Jewish custom. But still I’m a bit confused as to why there are differences in sequence in narration at the time of institution of the Lord’s Supper. Was Judas there at the time when the Lord’s Supper was instituted? As John’s Gospel tells, he left immediately after the received the bread, however Luke’s gospel sequence seems to indicate the he was there. Please can you just explain this a little further? Answer: We should not forget that John wrote the ‘Gospel of John’ very late in time and included many things that were not presented in the other Gospels. Therefore, we should read John 13 though 16 along with Matthew 26, Mark 14, and Luke 22 to understand about the Passover Dinner and the Lord’s Supper that were recorded. We are told that our Lord was present to eat it. Let us look into John’s Gospel, especially chapters 13-16. John 13:1-20 deals with gathering of the disciples with Lord Jesus Christ to eat the Passover Dinner. He washed their feet, including that of Judas. John 13:21-30 deals with the main course of the Passover Dinner. After receiving the morsel (sop - KJV), Judas was dismissed from the table. This ended the Passover Dinner, officially. John 13:31 onwards we read the discourse of our Lord after the establishment of the Lord’s Supper. Therefore, I consider, John13:30 is before the Lord’s Supper followed by John 13:31 Between John 13:30 and John 13:31 Lord Jesus Christ established the Lord’s Supper or the ‘Breaking of Bread’ for His remembrance by His disciples. A New covenant is established and the sign of the new covenant was given to be observed. The establishment of “Breaking of Bread” was for His memory and it included the “blood of the new covenant.” John 13:31 through chapter 16 provide the discourse of our Lord with His eleven (11) disciples and giving a new commandment. Later in John 17, in His prayer, Lord Jesus Christ presents the disciples as one with Him to the Father, never mentioned about any of their failures. Remember, our Lord told the disciples about their forsaking Him, Peter’s denial of Him, etc., when He was talking to them. But not when He was talking with His Father. A great salvation is shown for our encouragement to be true to Him.

66

Most of what we read in Matthew 26, Mark 14, and Luke 22 comes between John 13:30 and John 13:31. (Let me put it another way as I keep it in my mind: John 13:30 < (Matthew 26, Mark 14, and Luke 22) < John 13:31). Question: Was the Lord’s Table or the Lord ’s Supper part of the Passover supper? Answer: To understand whether the Lord’s Table or the Lord’s Supper was a part of the Passover Supper or not, we must go back to their original observance as instituted. First, let us look into Passover Supper in Exodus 12. “And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread; with bitter [herbs] shall they eat it” (Exodus 12:8). The literal translation of ‘herbs’ is ‘bitterness.’ According to the great Jewish Rabbi Hillel, the great grandfather of Simeon who blessed Jesus when He was brought to the temple and the greatgreat grandfather of Gamaliel who was the teacher of Saul of Tarsus, the original elements of the Passover were the lamb, the unleavened bread, and bitter herbs. As time passed various changes came into the practice of the observance of Passover. They introduced three breads (Matzos); a bag called ‘Afikomen,’ four cups of vine, and roasted egg as part of the supper. They also incorporated certain specific questions, four to be traditional, to be asked during the supper about the Passover. During the 20th century, there was an order in which these three Matzos and the four cups are to be taken. Matthew 26:20-25; Mark 14:17-21; Luke 22:14-18, and John 13:21-30 tell us about the Passover supper. There we read about the sop, bitter herbs. Judas left after receiving the sop (John 13:21-30). Thus the Passover Supper was completed as given in Exodus 12. When he received the sop, he has already eaten the lamb, the unleavened bread, and the bitter herbs. John 13:30 tell us, “Having therefore received the morsel, he went out immediately; and it was night.” There was a cup in Luke 22:17 and it was connected with the Passover that was eaten by the Lord Jesus Christ (Luke 22:14-17). It was before the institution of the Lord’s Supper, but there was a cup given to the disciples to share among them. This was the cup that was shared along with the bitter herbs. There was no mention of His remembrance. There are two cups in Luke 22. If we consider them as single, then we confound the scriptural truth and confusion and false teaching results. Matthew 26:20-25 and mark 14:17-21 tell us the same thing about eating the Passover Supper. In John 13:30 we read that Judas left immediately after receiving the morsel. Therefore, Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:1920 are not part of the Passover as it was instituted by Jehovah in Exodus 12. Hillel, the Jewish rabbi who lived before our Lord, bore witness to this. This is the institution of the Lord’s Supper, connected with the ground of gathering, by Lord Jesus Christ. When we talk about the Lord’s Table (1 Corinthians 10:21), it is in contrast to that of the Devil’s. The continuance of the Passover Supper along with the Lord’s Supper created problems for the early Christians as we read in 1 Corinthians 11. Therefore, the Passover supper was separated and Christians are told to eat it at home as their own and not along with the Lord’s Supper. Having said these let me also state that there are some difficulties to reconcile the report given in Luke’s Gospel. That will be cleared, in a future time, when we meet our Lord in the air. About the departure of Judas: was it voluntarily or not will become clear if we connect John 13:30 with John 13:26-27. “What thou doest, do quickly” is to be connected with “he went out immediately.” The phrase that indicates the time of day, “It was night,” may have the spiritual connotation of the condition of the world, as well as the physical time of the day. The command, “What thou doest, do quickly,” indicates the end of the Passover Supper. In this connection we may question which Gospel is right? Was Judas Iscariot present at the institution of the Lord’s Supper or not becomes a question of interest. In Luke 22:21 states, “Moreover, behold, the hand of him that delivers me up is with me on the table.” In the next verse we read, “And the Son of man indeed goes as it is determined, but woe unto that man by whom he is delivered up.” It was the “hand of him” was with the Lord Jesus Christ “on the table.” The bread was already eaten. If they have not finished drinking the cup, then the cup was on the table, a sign of the shedding of the blood. The hand was on the table to shed it. What about the person to whom the hand belonged? We are told that woe unto “that man.” The wordings are very important. We do not read about the man being present “on” the table. As a matter of fact none of the disciples were on the table. They were at the table. The hand of the one who delivered the Son was on the

67

table. No other hand was on the table. Judas was asked to leave. He went into the night, because he refused to believe on the light that came into world to lighten the world. He never saw another day. He died that night. But, his hand was doing the work on the next day helping the Jews and the Gentiles to crucify the Creator of all things. “That man’s” hand was “on the table” when he was meeting with the Jews to deliver the Lord Jesus Christ with a kiss. Those hands that embraced the Son as he kissed Him were “on the table,” but he was not at the table. In the Bible, Passover is called a sacrifice (Exodus 12:27). But nothing is burnt to the Lord, no part is carried out of the house, no sweet savor to the Lord, no altar, no place of approach, and nothing brought near. Coming near or communion with the Lord is not seen in Passover. It was God as Judge and it was their escape. It is important to read 1 Corinthians 5:7 and 1 Peter 1:18-20 to understand this. This was the only sacrifice at which our Lord Jesus Christ blessed with His physical presence, while He was on this earth. I am not considering Luke 2:21-40, because at that time He was brought to the temple by Mary as required by law at the completion of her purification. The Passover is the only sacrifice that He attended of Himself. He was there as the Judge showing the escape to His disciples, including Judas Iscariot. When the Passover Supper was finished, Judas Iscariot was asked to leave, because he did not have any part with the New Covenant. Those who had part with the New Covenant were asked to partake of the Lord’s Supper. We also read in John 13 that the Satan was waiting for his time to enter into Judas Iscariot, while he was sitting before the Judge showing him the way to escape. After he received the morsel, the sop, Satan entered into him. Though he saw the light, he was not in the light and ended his life in the night. He left his hand, (“What thou doest, do quickly” – John 13:27) “on the table” (Luke 22:21). It is true that the Jewish observance of the Passover will end, each year, only after the head of the house goes out and open the door and say “This year Elijah did not come.” The Jews expected the coming of Elijah in Might and Spirit of God for Israel. Lord Jesus Christ did not go to the door looking for Elijah. Instead He asked Judas to do what he has to do and that must be done quickly. It was in connection with the real Paschal Lamb being sacrificed for the redemption of the elect according to the eternal counsel of God before the foundation of this world. Question: I’m not able to understand this part(in bolds). Please bear with me. Can you explain me this part. In Luke 22:21 states, “Moreover, behold, the hand of him that delivers me up is with me on the table.” In the next verse we read, “And the Son of man indeed goes as it is determined, but woe unto that man by whom he is delivered up.” It was the “hand of him” was with the Lord Jesus Christ “on the table.” The bread was already eaten. If they have not finished drinking the cup, then the cup was on the table, a sign of the shedding of the blood. The hand was on the table to shed it. What about the person to whom the hand belonged? We are told that woe unto “that man.” The wordings are very important. We do not read about the man being present “on” the table. As a matter of fact none of the disciples were on the table. They were at the table. The hand of the one who delivered the Son was on the table. No other hand was on the table. Judas was asked to leave. He went into the night, because he refused to believe on the light that came into world to lighten the world. He never saw another day. He died that night. But, his hand was doing the work on the next day helping the Jews and the Gentiles to crucify the Creator of all things. “That man’s” hand was “on the table” when he was meeting with the Jews to deliver the Lord Jesus Christ with a kiss. Those hands that embraced the Son as he kissed Him were “on the table,” but he was not at the table. Answer: In Luke 22::22 we read the reference from the Lord Jesus Christ as, “that man,” and not “this man.” The Greek word t4ranslated as “that” is EKEINO (= that, that very, he, she) and “man” is ANTHROPOS (= man). The real expression is ANTHROPOS EKEINO (= man of that, or that man). The corresponding Greek word for ‘this’ is OUTOS (= this, he). OUTOS implies the presence of the person about whom it was mentioned, as in Mark 15:39, and therefore “this.” When it is EKEINO, the actual presence is not necessary. That is what we read in Luke 22:22 and the reference was to Judas Iscariot.

68

Another reason is that the mention of “hand of him” (singular) was “on the table.” It is not “hands of him.” The use of singular is indicative of the action of “that man” as opposed to being physically present with both hands. Therefore, I wrote that the wordings are important to consider when one is critical or trying to pin point the truth of the statement. If we do consider the wordings, then we receive a better understanding of how godbreathed (inspired by God) the words to be written by humans. Judas Iscariot’s actions (as a simile, ‘hand’ singular) were on the table. From Luke 22 and 1 Corinthians 11 we know that the actions resulted in the ‘body broken’ and ‘the shed blood.’ Question: When can a person take part in Lords Supper? Is it only after baptism? That is, is it necessary to take baptism before taking part of Lords Supper? Answer: The Lord Jesus Christ instituted the Lord Supper on the night in which He was betrayed. We read in Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20. The explanation of the doctrine of the Lords’ Supper is in 1 Corinthians 11:20-34. If we read John 13-16 from the light of 1 Corinthians 11:20-34, we will learn about the doctrine that is related to the Lord’s Supper. From all these references, we could learn that the Lord’s Supper is not for the unbelieving, including those who associate with believers. Judas Iscariot is the example. He was commanded to leave into the darkness before instituting the Lord’s Supper by the Lord Jesus Christ. We also do not read that the Lord Jesus Christ baptized the eleven disciples. We do not have a clear verse that provides this information. At the same time, we know that Ananias in Acts 9 baptized Apostle Paul. God used Apostle Paul to provide the doctrine regarding the Lord’s Supper. In Matthew 28:19-20 we read that the way in which a future believer became a disciple was to be by baptizing him/her in the name of “the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” Those who believed on the Day of Pentecost were baptized on the same day. From the Book of Acts we learn that this was the practice of the apostles. The Ethiopian eunuch was baptized soon after he believed. Apostle Paul was baptized before he ever had an opportunity to break bread at the Lord’s Supper. Even apostle Paul followed this practice as we learn from Acts 16 about the conversion of the Philippian Jailor. From all these, we could safely deduce that baptism was administered to a believer soon after his/her profession of becoming a believer. That makes it to another further deduction that baptism precedes breaking of bread at the Lord’s Supper, in the life of a new believer. We should also remember that baptism was never delayed or was postponed for a future date, as we may see in our time. It was done on the same day. Our delaying of the administration of baptism, whatever the reason may be, should not be an excuse to change the historical account that is given to us to follow in the Word of God. What about the eleven Apostles who broke bread on the first time, when the Lord instituted it? There could be many reasons. First, it was the first time that was conducted. Second, the Lord Jesus Christ administered it, personally. Third, baptism is a declaration of identification of a sinner with the Lord Jesus Christ publicly. All the eleven apostles did that by walking with Christ. Their walk was the testimony of their faith in Him as the Son of God. Peter proclaimed it in Matthew 16:16. Peter also repeated their faith in another way in John 6:68. Their baptism was walking with the Lord Jesus Christ and publicly acknowledging Him as their Lord and God. Judas Iscariot also walked with Christ and identified with Him, but he did not believe Him being the Son of God and having the words of eternal life, as the others did. Therefore, Judas Iscariot was not allowed to participate in the first breaking of bread by the Lord Jesus Christ. We should not allow one who is not a believer in Lord Jesus Christ as his personal Savior, Lord, and God to participate in the breaking of bread at the Lord’s Supper. Even if that person identifies with us to the best way, he can. Since baptism is given as the mark of discipleship of new believers and their submission to it is the only mark to identify such, we could say that baptism should precede breaking of bread at the Lord’s Table to eat the Lord’s Supper. vvv

69

Do it...

...in rememberance of Me

LOGOS MEDIA, P.B. No.8, Mulanthuruthy Phone: 9744041614, E-mail: [email protected] www.hopethroughgrace.com