Admonition Podcast

Good to see everyone out this evening in spite of the rain.

we'll get into our study.

Let's begin with the word of prayer.

Gracious Father in heaven, we come before your throne grateful for the day that you've
granted to us, the blessings that you give us, mindful of all that you have done for us

throughout this day and throughout every day of our lives.

Lord, we pray that we might always strive to be diligent in our efforts, diligent in our
labors and our work.

We might serve you acceptably and do that which is right in your sight.

Lord, we pray for this congregation and for its labors that they may grow and they may be
blessed.

We're grateful for what you have done for us throughout uh this year already and we pray
that we might continue to serve you faithfully throughout this year and throughout the

years to come.

Lord, we pray that you be with those who are dealing with illness, those who are
recovering from injuries or from

from sickness, Lord, we pray that you be with those who are struggling with ongoing health
concerns and issues and pray that they might have their strength returned back to them.

All these things we pray and ask in Jesus' name, amen.

Mark chapter 14, Jesus beginning in verse 13 tells the disciples, into the city and a man
will meet you carrying a water pitcher.

Follow him.

Wherever he goes in, say to the master of the house, the teacher says, where is the guest
room in which I may eat the Passover with my disciples?

Then he will show you a large upper room.

furnished and prepared their make ready for us.

So his disciples went out and came into the city and found it just as he had said to them,
and they prepared the Passover.

In the evening he came with the twelve.

Now as they ate, as they sat and ate, Jesus said, Assuredly I say to you, one of you who
eats with me will betray me."

And they began to be sorrowful and to say to him one by one, Is it I?

And another said, Is it I?

He answered and said to them, It is one of the twelve who dips with me in the dish.

The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of him.

But woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed.

It would have been good for that man if he had never been born." So as you find here in
the text,

Jesus uh sits down with the Passover meal with these disciples and Mark records the
revealing by Jesus of the fact that one of them was going to betray him.

And the response of the twelve is recorded by Mark, is it I, is it I, is it I?

Now was there one there who knew the answer?

Yes, actually it will be technical.

There were two there who knew the answer.

Jesus knew who it was and Judas knew who it was.

But as this continues, Jesus will say, is one of the 12 who dips with me in the dish.

Now, of course, if you read the other recordings of this event, you'll find out more about
the details and the things that go through with it.

go through that event.

We're not doing that not because the details are not important that are in the other
books, but because we're trying to get Mark's perspective.

We're trying to understand what Mark is teaching the people and there's a reason and it's
something sometimes when we want to get the whole picture of an event and we go from this

version, you know, this writer's uh writings about what occurred and then this one and
then this one, we lose vision of

Why is it being written?

What is the writer trying to convey to his audience, to the ones who receiving his uh
letter?

And Jesus here, as Mark portrays the events, uh we've already made mention that Mark is
one who uses the term immediately and deals with the quickness of the things that Jesus

did.

and the fact that Jesus was constantly moving and constantly active and constantly
teaching.

And so, he gives the progression, but he doesn't dwell on it.

He doesn't dwell on the details of the identifying of Judas.

He doesn't dwell on the discussion that John does.

He simply addresses, this is what occurred, and then moves forward.

In verse 22 we read, as they were eating, Jesus took bread and blessed and broke it and
gave it to them, or sorry, and said, Take, eat, this is my body.

As Jesus hands them the bread, he This is my body.

Is Jesus using

uh description or a use of the term body that is entirely metaphorical.

Is he saying that the flesh is his physical flesh?

No.

There are some who teach that when you consume the Lord's Supper, you consume the physical
flesh, you drink the physical blood of Christ in that memorial.

And yet that's not what Jesus teaches here.

They say, well, he says this

is my body.

We understand that there are figures of speech in which someone can say this is that and
it is in a representative way.

There are other figures of speech where we can say this is like that.

And as a result of the differences in like and is, sometimes people will be confused.

but the point that we're to understand from this and we're to gain from this that Jesus'
command was structured in a message that had already been taught.

If you turn back to John chapter 10 in your mind, John chapter 6 in your mind, you will
find other passages where Jesus teaches on this idea and so in one of those occasions

The people found the teaching so hard because they understood it the same way that many
misunderstand it today.

They understood it to mean Jesus was going to have people eat His actual body.

And they said, this is too hard.

Who can accept it?

And they went away.

I bring out the point because it was a misunderstanding then, it's a misunderstanding
today, and at some point when you sit down and study with someone you may find that that's

what they actually believe.

They believe in transubstantiation.

That's the big long word to describe that.

But then there are others will come to this passage and they will say,

that he took the bread and then verse 23, he took the cup and when he had given thanks he
gave it to them and they drank they all drink from it and so they'll come to this passage

and say see because they only use one cup the only thing that's authorized is one cup so
the only way to protect the Lord's Supper properly is to take one cup and everybody takes

a drink out of the same cup

Then he said to them, verse 24, this is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for
many.

Assuredly, I say to you, I will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine until that day
when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

Others will argue that because their belief, according to premillennialism, is that the
kingdom has not been established,

then this actual event that Jesus is speaking of has never actually taken place because
he's not drinking anew in the Kingdom of God because the Kingdom is not here yet.

Why mention all of these things?

Partly because you may study with someone who doesn't understand them.

But also partly because it is important for us to realize that sometimes people insert
into the text what they want it to say by way of how they interpret it.

They have a belief and instead of allowing the text to speak for itself,

Instead of allowing the text to be handled in a reasonable and right way, they want their
doctrine proven by the text.

When you go into the text, you'll see a number of things that I think are valuable.

First of all, the text says Jesus took bread.

Does it say what type of bread he took?

it just says he took bread.

So, can we just use any type of bread in the Lord's Supper?

As long as it's bread, it should be good enough, right?

I had a sandwich from Chick-fil-A.

Can we just go get Chick-fil-A buns and get some nice butter on them, stick those on the
Lord's table?

Why not?

Part of the reason why not is even when something is unstated explicitly in the text, by
the statements of the text, you have a context that demands what type of bread.

So what day, what feast were they observing?

Passover.

And in the Old Testament law,

What was not allowed to even be in the house during the Passover feast?

Leaven.

So could you have leavened bread during this meal when Jesus is observing the Passover?

No.

Add to that, when you have them partaking of the bread, and when you have it in the
context of the Passover, is there a typology from the Old Testament to the New Testament?

When you look at Exodus chapter 12 and the commands for the Passover lamb, matter of let's
do that for a moment, you're going to see some aspects of what the Old Testament

Israelites were commanded to do and the connection of those things to what Jesus is doing.

During the time of the plagues, while Israel was in Egypt, God is on that very last night
that they're going to be in Egypt.

God is going to establish this feast.

In Exodus chapter 12 and in verse 1 we read, Now the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron in the
land of Egypt, This month shall be your beginning of months.

It shall be the first month of the year to you.

speak to all the congregation of Israel, saying, On the tenth of this month every man
shall take for himself a lamb, according to the house of his father, a lamb for a

household.

And if the household is too small for the lamb, let him and his neighbor next to his house
take it according to the number of the persons, according to each man's need.

You shall make your count for the lamb.

Your lamb shall be without blemish."

a male of the first year.

You may take it from the sheep or from the goats.

Now you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month.

Then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it at twilight.

And they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and on the lintel of
the houses where they eat it.

Then they shall eat the flesh on that night, roasted in fire, with unleavened bread,

and with bitter herbs they shall eat it.

Do not eat it raw, nor boiled at all with water, but roasted in fire.

Its head with its legs and its entrails, you shall let none of it remain until morning,
and what remains of it until morning you shall burn with fire.

And thus you shall eat it with your belt on your waist, your sandals on your feet, and
your staff in your hand.

So shall you eat it in haste

it is the Lord's Passover.

For I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night, and I will strike all the
firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast, and against all the gods of Egypt I

will execute judgment, I am the Lord.

Now the blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you are, and when I see the
blood I will pass over you and the plague shall not be on you.

to destroy you when I strike the land of Egypt.

So this day shall be to you a memorial, and you shall keep it as a feast to the Lord
throughout your generations.

You shall keep it as a feast by an everlasting ordinance."

God, under the Old Testament, as He is establishing the Passover, is going to tell the
Israelites, you're going to keep this feast until I tell you to stop.

You're going to keep this as an everlasting ordinance.

As long as my covenant with you continues, you're going to keep this feast.

uh

Did they keep it faithfully throughout their generations?

No.

But God had commanded them that they were to keep this feast and they were to do it a
certain way.

And did God specify the things they were to use in the feast?

Yes, He did.

And did He specify how often they were to keep the feast?

How did He specify how often they were to keep the feast?

Okay?

So he said, you're going to keep this on, and first of all he pointed out, this is going
to be the beginning of your calendar.

God is going to start them all over and say, this is when your year begins.

Now was it in the middle of the Egyptian January uh at that moment in time?

Probably not.

God didn't care.

God said,

Here's when your calendar starts.

On the first month of the year, on this day, you're going to keep this feast.

So God declared and commanded that they were going to keep the feast once a year.

You say, Aaron, I don't read where He says for them to keep it every year.

I only read that they're supposed to keep it in the first month of the year.

Okay.

Do we see the problem?

How many years have a first month?

of them do.

And since all of them have a first month, which years are they supposed to keep the
Passover?

Love them!

When Jesus is going to establish that which we now often refer to as the Lord's Supper,
Jesus is going to establish it upon the principles and in the backdrop and in the context

of the Passover.

But Jesus, as the church is given birth and brought forward, is going to deliver through
the Holy Spirit the fact that they were to uh partake of this on the first day of the week

this memorial was to be held.

So the question, how many weeks have a first day?

All of them.

So which ones are supposed to be, are we supposed to keep the memorial on?

The special ones?

I know, on Easter, right?

All of them.

When you have in the text details, you have to ask yourself which of these details are
instructive, which of them are incidental, which of them are commanded, and which of them

are simply describing the scenario of the time.

Okay, so let's go back through the text and ask ourselves, are there any details in here
that really, clearly are incidental details?

If we were to go back into the text, you remember that the feast that they're eating was
being eaten in an upper room.

So, or false, the only way you can protect the Lord's Supper correctly is if you eat it in
an upper room.

I don't know anybody who teaches that doctrine.

which if we understand that, we have now identified that there are incidental details in
the text.

There are details that are neither binding nor a command because they are just describing
what occurred.

Well, maybe we should ask it this way.

Would it be wrong to eat the Lord's Supper in an upper room?

No.

As a matter of fact, you find an occasion over in the book of Acts where Paul in Acts
chapter 20 will meet with the apostles in an upper room.

And why did they meet in the upper room?

Do you remember what the text says?

Because there were many lights in the upper room.

What does that tell you about the time they were meeting?

It was night time.

They met in the upper room because it was convenient.

They could see.

That's pretty convenient if you're meeting.

So they met in an upper room.

The fact that they met in an upper room and that there were many lights there was that
incidental or commanded or necessary.

It was incidental.

It was what they did because it facilitated what they needed.

But it wasn't commanded.

Paul didn't go around and say, you didn't protect the Lord's Supper in an upper room, you
didn't take it faithfully.

But let us further examine.

How did they find the place where they were going to eat the feast?

Alright, they followed Jesus' instruction, they went into the city, they found a person
who was carrying a pitcher of water.

In order to keep and eat the Lord's Supper faithfully, do you have to follow a person
who's carrying a pitcher of water and make sure that person is a male in order to find the

correct location to eat the Lord's Supper?

Why not?

because there are some details that are incidental and there are some that are
prescriptive or commandments and we have to be able to discern between the two.

So let's go back down.

As they were eating, oh, here we go, here's another one.

In order to take the Lord's Supper faithfully, do you have to take it in conjunction with
another

regular meal.

But they did.

As a matter of fact, turn to 1 Corinthians chapter 11.

In 1 Corinthians chapter 11 beginning in verse 17, Paul is going to deal with the fact
that the Corinthians also ate the Lord's Supper in conjunction with another meal.

We read in verse 17, Now in giving these instructions I do not praise you, since you come
together not for the better but for the worse.

For first of all when you come together as a church,

I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it.

For there must also be factions among you that those who are approved may be recognized
among you.

Therefore, when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper." He
says, for in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others, and one is hungry and

another is drunk.

What?

Do you not have houses to eat and drink in?

Or do you despise the Church of God and shame those who have nothing?

What shall I say to you?

Shall I praise you in this?

I do not praise you.

For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on
the same night in which he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke

it and said, Take eat, this is my body which is broken for you.

do this in remembrance of me.

In the same manner he also took the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant
in my blood.

This do as often as you drink it in remembrance of me.

For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till
he comes.

Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner
will be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord.

But let a man examine himself

examine himself and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup for he who eats and
drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself not discerning the Lord's

body.

For this reason many are weak and sick among you and many sleep for if we would judge
ourselves we would not be judged but when we are judged we are chastened by the Lord that

oh we may not be condemned with the world.

Therefore, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another.

But if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, lest you come together for judgment, and the
rest I will set in order when I come." So what was going on here?

Well, here's what was going on in the Corinthians congregation.

They were assembling on the first day of the week.

and as was common in the first century, they assembled for a meal, for fellowship, and for
the breaking of bread.

They assembled together as a church and they ate together a meal, and also assembled for
worship.

And during the period of worship, they also partook of the Lord's Supper.

What the Corinthians had done is they'd shoved them all together.

And the partaking of the Lord's Supper was a function of their coming together for a meal.

but some of them were wealthy.

And some of them were in deep poverty.

And the wealthy ones would get there first, probably because Sunday, by the way, in the
first century was a work day.

It was a day where especially those who were slaves had to work.

Those who were poor had to work.

And so when they would assemble together, the wealthy ones showed up first.

And they had an abundance.

And they just went ahead and started eating.

And the poor ones showed up, and Paul says, and there was nothing left.

because you didn't wait for them.

So now the ones who have something are fed and the ones who are in poverty are destitute.

And you want them to come and worship and you won't even share food with them?

on to it he says you've taken the Lord's Supper and you've shoved it into nothing more
than a common meal.

So in this text, Paul demonstrates that what they had done, which was part of the thing
they had understood from the accounts of the Lord's Supper, that was the eating of a

common meal and the partaking of the memorial, they were doing erroneously, and he tells
them, stop, go eat your meal at home.

Is Paul telling them to eat their meal at home because Paul is opposed to the assembly
also having a meal associated with it?

How do we know?

Paul just said, if anyone's hungry, let him eat at home.

Well, let's turn over to Acts chapter 20.

Acts chapter 20 and in verse 7, Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came
together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued

his message until midnight.

There were many lamps in the upper room where they were gathered together, and in a window
sat a certain young man named Eutychus, who was sinking into a deep sleep.

He was overcome by sleep and as Paul continued speaking he fell down from the third story
and was taken up dead.

But Paul went down, fell on him, and embracing him said, Do not trouble yourselves for his
life is in him.

Now when he had come up and had what?

Broken bread and eaten and talked a long while.

Even until daybreak, he departed.

And they brought the young man in alive, and they were not a little comforted.

In this same passage where the text says that they gathered together on the first day of
the week to break bread,

What did they also do while they were assembled?

They ate a meal!

Now, some may conclude that's because Paul preached so long that he preached till
midnight, then a guy fell asleep, fell out of a window and died, then he continued talking

to them all the way until morning.

They had to eat a meal!

They were there for like 12 hours!

But see, some will argue from 1 Corinthians 11 and the fact that Paul says, don't you have
houses to eat in?

It is not scriptural for the congregation to have a kitchen and eat a meal in the building
because they claim that's the house of God.

And if you're hungry, go home and eat.

Except that's not what Paul's arguing against in the Corinthian church.

Paul's arguing against them turning the worship assembly into nothing more than a common
meal.

and in doing so they're not even providing the meal to those who are destitute.

They're showing a lack of love, they're showing a lack of concern, they're showing a lack
of understanding concerning what the Lord's Supper is and what it was created for and its

purpose, and they are eating and drinking condemnation to themselves because they're not
discerning the purpose of the memorial.

They're making it about them and not about Christ.

So, let's go back to Mark.

Mark chapter 14, we've already concluded that they don't have to meet in an upper room,
though they could.

We've already concluded that they don't have to eat a meal because Paul told them at
Corinth to quit because of how they were doing it, but they did still have to partake of

the Lord's Supper.

So it is both possible to eat a meal at an assembly and not eat a meal.

at an assembly, which makes the eating of the meal here in this text incidental.

Okay?

It's not a command, it's not a requirement, it is incidental.

Now notice what else we read.

As you go through the text, uh we have here in verse 22, as they were eating, Jesus took
bread and broke it and gave it to them and said, take eat, this is my body.

Is the physical breaking of the bread incidental, required, or commanded?

Some would argue it's required.

It's not commanded because he didn't command them to do it.

What did he command them to do?

Take it and eat.

He did the breaking, they didn't do the breaking.

He broke it, he handed it to them.

He told them take and eat.

So it's not commanded first.

He didn't tell them to do it.

He didn't give an explicit command.

Is it required?

That's the next question.

Or is it incidental?

How many people were eating?

13?

How many original pieces of bread were there?

The likelihood is one, we'll just give it to the number one because it's listed in the
singular form.

He took bread, okay?

So we'll argue one.

How do you get 12 people fed with one object?

You break it.

You can either break it by everybody biting a piece off, that's going to break it.

Or you break it in advance and you hand it to somebody.

Either way, you broke it.

So is the text commanding, requiring the breaking of bread?

Or is it simply describing what he did?

And I would suggest to you that most likely based upon all the other texts where we have
the Lord's Supper described, that it's simply describing it.

But it becomes a

common description so much so that it becomes the synonym for the Lord's Supper.

What did they call the Lord's Supper?

Next chapter too, breaking of bread.

Acts chapter 20, breaking a bread.

But by the way, that was a common description because elsewhere in the New Testament they
describe a meal as breaking bread.

It was a common description, okay?

It does not imply necessarily that it is a requirement that the person who uh use
accommodative terms we use in modern times quite often, who is presiding over the Lord's

Supper

breaks the bread.

If we were to be consistent with that, because I've seen some congregations where they
argue, if you don't have one loaf and then you break it before you pass it out, you're

sinning.

If we were to be consistent with that, he'd have to break it for everybody.

He couldn't just break it once, because the text indicates Jesus broke a piece off, passed
it, broke a piece off, passed it, broke a piece off, passed it.

They didn't just ceremonially break it.

So one or the other.

Okay?

Now, you also have, as you go down, he took the cup.

And when he had given things, he gave it to them and they drank from it.

Now, Mark's text says they drank from it, but let's go back over there to 1 Corinthians
chapter 11 and notice what Paul said.

Verse 23, for I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord
Jesus on the same night in which he was betrayed took bread.

And when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, Take eat, this is my body, which is
broken for you.

Do this in remembrance of me.

In the same manner he also took the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the New
Testament, or the New Covenant, in my blood.

This do as often as you drink it in remembrance of me, for as often as you eat this bread
and drink this cup you

proclaim the Lord's death till he comes.

Now you remember how we talked about the use of one term and another term being
descriptive but not equal?

And sometimes we use a certain figure, would say, is like that.

But in some cases, you just say, this is that.

Did they drink the cup or did they drink the contents?

Well, they didn't liquefy the cup.

They didn't melt down the cup to drink the cup.

But what does Paul say?

This cup, not the fruit of the vine in it, this cup is the new covenant in my blood.

This do as often as you drink it.

What is the preceding subject from the it?

What's the nearest antecedent?

It's the cup.

Not the contents.

If we were to be technical, would say, a minute, the cup means cup, not contents.

If we were to improperly handle it,

by way of language, and yet Paul says, for as often as you eat this bread and drink this
cup.

You proclaim the Lord's death till he comes.

This is by the way, one of those clear indicators where you can say, wait a minute, Paul's
using the term cup, but he means the contents.

Could that not also be true when Jesus says this is my flesh, but he means it represents
it?

Okay, it's entirely consistent in the language.

for both of those things to be true.

So back over in the text we read, is my blood of the new covenant which is shed for many.

Mark gives you the meaning.

Paul gives you the container.

He says, this is my covenant of the new covenant which is shed for many as assuredly I say
to you I will no longer drink

of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God." Mark
gives you the meaning and the substance, and Paul gives you the container.

What's the point?

The point is that they were commanded to drink the fruit of the vine.

Could they choose what they drank?

Could they just drink any, you know what?

Pepsi's really popular among our congregation.

Why don't we, sweet tea's really good.

Why don't, why

Why?

Because Jesus specified.

Jesus was particular with what he did and because there is an Old Testament type that if
you violate, we can talk about this later, but if you violate the type you sin.

So here in the text.

Paul is going to say, drink the cup.

And Mark is going to say, drink the fruit of the vine.

And Mark's also going to say, it's representative of his blood.

That's what the picture is.

That's what it represents in the memorial.

And they're commanded to do it every single time.

And they're commanded to do it every single.

week where there's a first day and how many first days of the week are there?

One.

No, there's only one first day of the week and how many weeks have a first day?

All of them.

So why do we partake of the Lord's Supper and why do we only use the fruit of the vine

and the bread, and why do we make sure and do it on the first day of the week and not on
Friday and not during a wedding and not on special ceremonies?

And the answer is because none of those things are commanded.

We are commanded to partake of it on the first day of the week.

It is part and parcel to the worship assembly of the church from Acts 2 at its inception
all the way forward.

It is to be done in consideration of Christ and His sacrifice and not our own personal
substance and nutrition.

It is not to be mixed with a meal so as to dilute the meaning of this supper.

It is to be done when all

of the Christians are present, that is to say we don't rush to do it the moment we walk
through the door.

You know what?

I already took it.

Y'all just go ahead whenever you're ready.

No.

It is something we do together.

It is a memorial of Christ that is commanded.

and is representative of a message from the Old Testament of salvation.

So, as you go through and study a text, as you read concerning the events of Christ's
life, one of the things I encourage you to do is ask yourself the question, is it

commanded?

Is it required?

Is it incidental?

And how can we know the difference?

Sometimes we need some other passages to help.

Sometimes when we read the other passages, we go, look, it's an incidental.

Or it's commanded because another passage clearly states the command and one passage
doesn't.

Or sometimes passage goes, here's an example of how we know it's not commanded because
guess what?

Paul just commanded them not to do that when they assemble.

Okay?

Some thoughts that I thought might be useful.

The more time you spend studying with people, the more of these things you're going to run
into.

And they're going to ask you questions.

Now, if you're in the middle of a personal Bible study and you're going through back to
the Bible when they ask you, you defer, don't debate.

Okay, thank you for your attention.