Story Archive November 19, 2003 (Page 1 of 1)

by Mitchell Skelton 1 Corinthians 11:17–34

Priscilla Larson, of Lexington, Mass., tells of the time her brother-in-law (a preacher) had been away from home one afternoon donating his blood at the Red Cross. The preacher's son was concerned when his father didn't come home at his usual time, so he asked his mother, "Is dad going around visiting all the sick people?" His mother replied, "No honey, he's giving blood." He paused in deep thought for a moment and then as his eyes lit up he exclaimed, "But we know it's really grape juice, don't we, mom?"/1

At a tender age, this little boy knew what many of us, far advanced in years, should know: the cup of communion represents the blood of Jesus. The very mention of blood reminded him of the Lord's Supper.

In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul seeks to correct some serious problems the Christians at Corinth had with the practice of the Lord's Supper. Paul reminds them of Jesus' institution of this sacred emblem and instructs them concerning: (1) It's Practice; (2) It's Purpose; and (3) It's Perpetuity.

The Practice of the Memorial Supper

The Lord's Supper was meant to be partaken by the assembled church. Paul's language in 1 Corinthians leaves no doubt that the memorial supper was to be eaten when the church "comes together." By implication, we know that Paul is speaking of the God-ordained assembly of the church on the first day of the week. Scripture states that the Lord's Supper was taken on the first day of the week. "On the first day of the week we came together to break bread" (Acts 20:7a).

Christ gave the implements of the Lord's Supper. In all four gospel accounts, we can read of the inception of this meal by the Lord himself. The three elements to be used in this memorial meal are shown to us by Christ's example: unleavened bread, fruit of the vine, and prayer. (Matt. 26:26–30)

The Purpose of the Memorial Supper

The Lord's Supper is a memorial of Christ's death. Most people understand that, as we eat the bread, which represents Christ's body, and as we drink the fruit of the vine, which represents his blood, we remember those moments on the cross where he gave his all for us. However, the significance of the meal goes much further in its meaning.

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 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." In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup (1 Cor. 11:23–28).

The Lord's Supper looks forward to Christ's second coming. This is evident by the command to partake of it "until he comes." The Lord's Supper is evangelistic in nature. When we partake of the supper, Paul says, "You proclaim the Lord's death." Each time we eat the Lord's Supper we show to those around that we care that Christ cared. The Lord's Supper is a cause for self-examination. The serious nature of the individual's state of mind when he eats the memorial meal is seen by Paul's statement against eating "in an unworthy manner." Participation in the memorial meal should help us to take a personal inventory of our faith.

The Perpetuity of the Memorial Supper

Christ intended for His memorial to be observed "until he comes" (1 Cor. 11:26; Matt. 26:29). Scripture implies that the Lord's Supper was to be observed on the first day of every week. In each incident of Christians meeting on the first day of the week in the New Testament we also see a reference to "breaking bread" or the Lord's Supper. Early church and secular history show that Christians came together on Sunday for the purpose of worship with the central element of their worship being the Lord's Supper.

The Lord's Supper is a God-ordained part of our worship to him. Jesus Christ gave us the practice we follow. The purpose is to remember Christ and proclaim his death. Christ intended for us to keep it in perpetuity or "until he comes."

Most people would not dare to ridicule Christ by changing its practice nor would they substitute its purpose for any other reason than that which Christ intended; neither should we fail in observing the supper as Christ intended.

1/Illustration taken from Jeff Strite at SermonCentral.com

by Barry Newton

Perhaps you will remember several years ago a lot of talk about "junk DNA." At that time it was common to hear that a large part of human DNA was simply worthless genetic material which had been accumulated over a long evolutionary process.

When scientists first analyzed DNA, they discovered it was composed of both protein coding sequences (genes) and non-protein coding sequences (introns). The long non-protein coding information sequences called introns exist both between genes and within genes.

As far as scientists knew, only the genes were of any value. Since genes make up about only 2% of our DNA, what this meant for human DNA was that 98% of our DNA was considered to be junk.

Because introns did not produce proteins, they "'were immediately assumed to be evolutionary junk.' That assumption was too hasty. 'Increasingly we are realizing that there is a large collection of "genes" that are clearly functional even though they do not code any protein' but produce only RNA."/1

In the words of an article in November's issue of Scientific American, "'What was damned as junk because it was not understood may, in fact, turn out to be the very basis of human complexity.' ... there is good reason to suspect that is true."/2 The article also admits, "The failure to recognize the importance of introns 'may well go down as one of the biggest mistakes in the history of molecular biology.'"/3

Why have scientists overlooked the non-protein coding information sequences? "For decades, pseudogenes have been written off as molecular fossils, the remains of genes that were broken by mutation and abandoned by evolution."/4 The article goes on to point out that in mice one of these pseudogenes "controls the expression of the 'real' gene ... even though the two lie on different chromosomes. There is nothing pseudo about that."/5

For those of us who know that life is the creative handiwork of God, this recent discovery is not surprising. It is exactly what we would expect to be true.

1/W. Wayt Gibbs, "The Unseen Genome," Scientific American (November 2003): 49. 2/Ibid. p. 53. 3/Ibid. p. 50 4/Ibid. p. 50 5/Ibid. p.50