In recent centuries the question has been raised of how we to understand and explain Christ’s presence in the Holy Communion. Is Christ present at all? Is he only “spiritually” present? Is he physically present mysteriously hidden in the bread and wine? Or does the bread and wine cease to exist and only Christ is present in it?
To answer this question, we want to turn to the divine writings of Holy Scripture. And while there may be a temptation to teach more than they say (adding to), or the temptation to explain away what they say (taking away from), our goal is to say exactly what they say, no more and no less, and to believe what they proclaim in faith.
The following are the places in God’s Holy Word which explicitly speak of the Lord’s Supper.
The Teaching of Our Lord Jesus
Matthew 26:26-29
26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.”
Questions:
What does Jesus call the bread he gives them to eat?
What does Jesus call the wine he gives them to drink?
What makes it difficult to accept Jesus' explanation that they are recieving his body and blood?
(a) We don't sense/taste/see his body and blood.
(b) We have a difficulty understanding and believing a miracle takes place in this meal.
(c) We think he wants us to understand it figuratively. (Is there something in the text to indicate his intention is figurative?)
Mark 14:22-24
22 And as they were eating, he took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” 23 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. 24 And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.”
Questions:
Why would Jesus (God in the flesh) call the bread his flesh and the wine his blood if he meant something different? Did Jesus assume when he said “take, this is my body” and “this is my blood” that we would know that he really meant “take, this is not really my body” and “this is not really my blood”?
Luke 22:17-20
17 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, “Take this, and divide it among yourselves. 18 For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” 19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."
The three gospels above contain the Institution of the Last Supper, whereas the Gospel of John includes the following. It’s long but important to read through carefully.
John 6:35-69
35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
41 So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— 46 not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father.
47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”
Question: How does Jesus describe himself in vs. 51? How does He describe the bread he will give?
52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
Question: What are the Jews disputed among themselves? What did they understand him to be teaching? (vs 52)
Notice how Jesus responds to their disputing.
53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate, and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 Jesus said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.
Questions:
What is Jesus' response to their dispute? (vs 53-58) Does he tell them, “I don't really mean you will eat my flesh" or does he double down?
If Jesus wanted to teach that he would give them his flesh to eat and blood to drink, what could he have said to convince you? Could he have said one of the following statements in a more clear way?
(a) “Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life" (vs 54a)
(b) “My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink." (vs 55)
(c) “Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him." (vs 56)
60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) 65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” 66 After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him. 67 So Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?” 68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, 69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”
Questions:
Our natural response is the same as the disciples who said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” (vs 60). What is Jesus' response to them? Vs 61-62, “But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?" Jesus says, if you have trouble believing this miracle, what will you do when you see me ascend into heaven? Why are miracles difficult for us to believe?
The work of Christ is not to be understood from a human/natural/fleshly reasoning and logic, but must be understood by the power of the Holy Spirit. “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all." Jesus says if we try to understand these things using our flesh, it is “of no help at all." Ultimately, believing in Christ and the work of Christ requires faith given by the Holy Spirit ("some of you do not believe").
There were two response to Jesus' “hard saying" by those around him?
A. Rejection/Unbelief because they couldn't receive it - “After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him." (vs 66)
B. Humble faith and belief - “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”
If you would have been one of the disciples with Jesus during this teaching, would you have left him because it was a hard saying or responded like the ones that continued following?
The Teaching of the Apostle Paul
1 Cor 10:14-22
14 Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. 18 Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? 19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?
Questions:
Why do you think Paul specifically mentions "the blood of Christ" and "the body of Christ”?
If Paul wanted to teach that we participate/fellowship with Christ's body and blood in Holy Communion, could he have said it in another way that would be more clear?
Paul argues that it is possible to be "participants with demons" by/through drinking of the cup of demons. He says instead Christians should only "partake of the table of the Lord."
1 Cor 11:17-34
23 For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
Questions:
What teaching and words does Paul pass on to the church in Corinth? Where did get them from?
Sometimes modern people see “in remembrance of me” and assume that means Jesus isn’t present. Does remembering a person, or persons act, require that person not be present? Of course not. All the time we remember the heroes of 9/11 or war hero’s in their presence.
27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. 31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world. 33 So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another— 34 if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home—so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come.
Questions:
Here Paul connects “eats the bread or drinks the cup of the lord” with “the body and the blood of the Lord.” If Paul is not teaching the Lord's Supper is Christ's body and blood, why does he describe it with these specific terms?
Is there anything in this passage that explicitly or implicitly teaches the Supper is something other than His body and blood?
What other questions do these passages raise for you? Are there other Scripture passages guiding your understanding of this topic?
Summary Questions:
Summary of what Scripture teaches: In the bread and wine of Holy Communion we also receive the body and blood of Christ. The bread and wine are still fully bread and wine but Christ is also present. This is a miracle. We don’t understand it but accept the words of Scripture which teach us it is true and with the disciples we say, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”
Is there any Scripture from the Word of God that explicitly teaches we are to understand the Lord’s Supper in any way other than Christ’s real presence in the meal? If not, is it not dangerous to subtract from what God’s Word teaches?
What do you find most difficult in accepting the teaching of our Lord and the apostle Paul who state in no un-clear terms that in eating the bread and drinking the cup, we are also eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ? What do you think that difficulty is rooted in?
The invitation of our Lord is not that we have to fully understand but simply hear his promises and respond in faith to them. “I died for the forgiveness of your sins.” Lord, I believe. “I have given you the Holy Spirit” Lord, I believe. “I will physically raise you up on the last day.” Lord, I believe. “I give you my flesh and blood in the Holy Supper.” Lord, I believe.