The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper – Part 2 episode artwork

EPISODE · Mar 21, 2020 · 13 MIN

The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper – Part 2

from Grace Presbyterian Church (PCA) · host Brad Mills

We are taking the time to reflect upon the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. As I explained in a previous video, we were about to wrap up a series on Revelation and move into a series on Matthew 26-28. In particular, I intend on teaching about communion (Mt. 26:26-29), crucifixion (Mt. 27), resurrection (Mt. 28a), and commission (28b). In the previous video, I introduced the subject and why it is important for us to consider. There church’s practice of communion The post The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper – Part 2 appeared first on Grace Presbyterian Church (PCA).

Episode metadata supplied by the publisher feed · Published Mar 21, 2020

Embed this episode

We are taking the time to reflect upon the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. As I explained in a previous video, we were about to wrap up a series on Revelation and move into a series on Matthew 26-28. In particular, I intend on teaching about communion (Mt. 26:26-29), crucifixion (Mt. 27), resurrection (Mt. 28a), and commission (28b). In the previous video, I introduced the subject and why it is important for us to consider. There church’s practice of communion has been dysfunctional since the early church. Today, it would seem that most people error on the side taking the Lord’s Supper too lightly. They minimize its importance. Maybe they don’t ever participate in it. Or maybe when they partake, their minds are not engaged. Oftentimes, the preacher takes no time to explain or fence the table so anyone and everyone present is permitted to take it however they see fit. None of these practices are healthy. We will cover some of those issues later, but in this video, I simply want to consider the four major views of the Lord’s Supper. The Views of the Lord’s Supper Transubstantiation This is the Roman Catholic view. They point to Jesus’ words, “This is my body” (Matt 26:26; Mk 14:22; Lk 22:19; 1 Co 11:24), and “This is my blood” (Mk 14:24). They determine that the bread and wine transform into the body and blood of Christ. During the priest’s prayer of consecration, the substance of the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. However, they borrow from Aristotelian metaphysics to suggest that even though the substance of the elements have been changed, the accidents/species (physical attributes) remain the same. In other words, what appears to be bread and wine, has become something else in reality. Obviously, Jesus was physically present at the table, but he was holding the bread in his hands. None of the disciples got confused at that point and said, “Wait, are you saying your body literally became that loaf of bread right now?” None of them were thinking that. It’s like that FDA commercial from the late 80s: “This is your brain. This is your brain on drugs. Any questions?” I can assure you, I was nine-years-old when I watch that, I never thought–“That’s not my brain, that’s an egg!” I understood the egg was being used to represent my brain. The grammatical term for this is metonymy. The bread is a sign/symbol of Christ’s body, just as the FDA used an egg to represent the human brain. We see several examples of this in Scripture (i.e., the water of baptism = cleansing/regeneration, rock = Christ, dove = Holy Spirit). Consubstantiation Martin Luther challenged the teaching of the Roman Catholic church and corrected a host of theological problems. His view of consubstantiation stresses that the elements remain the elements. He rejected the notion of substance and accidents. No transformation takes place. However, in explaining Jesus’ words, “This is my body”, Luther argued that Christ’s body and blood are in, with, and under the elements. He used the analogy of an iron that is heated by fire. The iron remains iron, but it is dramatically impacted by its union with the fire. This is the sense in which the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. He argued that a sacramental union that takes place in the Lord’s Supper. The problem with this view is that it requires that the body of Christ be ubiquitous/omnipresent, present everywhere. If Jesus was indeed raised to life and ascended into heaven in his glorified human body, then in what sense can his body be everywhere? In order for consubstantiation to work as Luther explained it, the body of Christ had to be in several places at once (at least wherever the Lord’s Supper was being taken). And if that is the case, then in what sense is it a human body? Humans cannot be omnipresent. Memorialism This led to the view of Ulrich Zwingli who took a very different approach. He emphasized Christ’s words, “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Co 11:24-25). He removed the sacr

Distinct summary based on available episode metadata or transcript content.

NOW PLAYING

The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper – Part 2

0:00 13:28

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

No similar episodes found.

No similar podcasts found.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of Grace Presbyterian Church (PCA)?

This episode is 13 minutes long.

When was this Grace Presbyterian Church (PCA) episode published?

This episode was published on March 21, 2020.

Can I download this Grace Presbyterian Church (PCA) episode?

Yes. Use the download control on the episode player to save the publisher-provided media file.
URL copied to clipboard!