Published: April 25, 2024 | Speaker: Chuck Hartman | Series: Leviticus - The Parable of Leviticus 1 - Part 13 | Scripture: 1 Corinthians 11:17-34
Transcript
View Full Transcript →
0:01
father again we thank you for this opportunity to be together to be in your word we do pray that your Holy Spirit would guide our thoughts as we consider the peace offerings of
0:13
Leviticus but also the the Lord's Supper we ask that you would clear our minds and help us to uh think about what we're studying and uh we do pray that you
0:25
would bless us and that our gathering would be indeed pleasing in your sight for we ask in Jesus name amen this past Sunday we sang A Hymn
0:37
from the Trinity Himel um it's a communion hymn and uh I went ahead and and typed it out here on the first page of the week 12 notes the second stanza
0:49
is really kind of where I want to begin uh reads and and this is from it's dating from the 6th Century I I read that at the top of the hymns but then
1:00
what what language would it have been in in the sixth Century Latin I mean not King James English you know it would have been so I don't know whether the translation is is
1:10
all that accurate but where the passal blood is poured death's Dark Angel sheathes his sword Israel's hosts triumphant go through the wave that drowns the foe praise we Christ whose
1:23
blood was shed pasal victim pasal bread with sincerity and love eat we Mana from above I throw that Mana in there that's a little artistic license there I don't
1:34
think Mana was involved in the Passover seder um but this hymn does reflect um one of the earliest
1:45
indications of the church's Association of communion or the Lord's supper with the Passover
2:04
and this has become since the Reformation at least among Protestants pretty much standard fair that when we think of the Passover uh we think of I'm sorry when we think of the Lord's Supper
2:15
we think of of Passover um Michael Horton uh who's kind of a contemporary um he's he's probably one of the most rabid reformed uh writers
2:26
out there um and he really is you you know very very gung-ho for reformed theology he says the Lord's Supper replaces Passover at Passover on the
2:38
evening on which he would be handed over rather than passed over in judgment now that's that that's right there is isog
2:49
Jesus Jesus instituted the supper as my blood of the Covenant which is poured out for many for the Forgiveness of sins and he put the Forgiveness of sins in
3:02
italics as if the Passover was an atoning sacrifice okay so we have some assumptions that go on here um and but what we basically have
3:14
is this
3:31
sacraments and this becomes a a major feature of the Protestant Reformation in the early 16th century the Roman Catholic or the Catholic church had settled on seven
3:45
sacraments the sacramental doctrine of EX oper operado meaning all they have to do is do it and it works the condition of the priest and even the condition of
3:56
the observant doesn't really matter it's the it's the kind of the magic uh of the sacrament that matters all of that had been pretty much settled through the 13th century um Thomas aquinus took us a
4:10
long way down that road and so when the reformers come along one of their major um problems with the Roman Catholic Church was the
4:21
sacraments and what the church taught about the sacraments and so what the reformers did first of all
4:37
we're going to go from seven to two but how do we get those two okay two okay well there's both a legitimate and a not so legitimate
4:48
so legitimate way that we arrive at the two that that we now have and that is the Lord's Supper baptism and the Lord's Supper so we go from the seven sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church by the way there
4:58
had been a time as many as 12 or 14 sacraments they got paired down to seven over the history seven being a perfect number a number of completeness that seemed to be the goal but now we're down
5:11
to two and how how do you get there well what you look at what the Lord commanded his disciples to
5:21
do as he was leaving basically before he died um he said um do this in remembrance of me as often as you drink
5:32
it as often as you eat it in remembrance of Me Okay so the legitimate way that we get down to two is what has the
5:44
Lord commanded or I'm going to say ordained which is where we get the word ordinance and many that's what they referred to they don't call it a
5:54
Sacrament they call it an ordinance because that way you get away from the Roman Catholic vibe and you're just saying this is what the Lord ordained we do it because he said so well he said go into all the world
6:06
baptizing in my in the name of the father and the Son and the Holy Spirit so you you end up with um
6:25
Supper okay can anybody think of a third one that some people have tried to throw in there because the Lord said to do it foot it foot washing yeah so what about foot
6:37
washing this doe okay I didn't make it they didn't make the short list okay it didn't so like
6:47
whatever of course that not being among the the sacraments or the ordinance of the Christian Church kind of shows a little bit of a flaw maybe in the method
6:59
methodology of selecting those ordinances are are we are we being consistent or or do we choose to to um
7:09
allegorize the foot washing but not the Lord's supper or baptism okay well this is this this was kind of a minor thing among the reformers what they were
7:20
really getting at and especially Calvin was they were looking to replace with a new testament sac
7:30
some ritual of the Old Testament and so you get this replacement Sacrament idea where
7:46
um you're replacing an Old Testament ritual and we're of course familiar with
7:57
baptism what does what does baptism replace circumcision okay so here's that replacement baptism replaces circumcision I should have this the
8:08
other way around but I'll say replaces right and that's you know throughout the at least the the reformed
8:19
faith of the 16th 17th century and on into the 21st century the idea that circumcision was the sign of the Covenant and now baptism is the sign of
8:29
the New the New Covenant do we need to say that it replaces or can we just say that continues well the reformed Doctrine is
8:40
that it replaces but can we say that it continues instead no we can't say that it continues um because it is a completely different uh thing and it's done in a
8:52
completely different way uh in terms of for example they don't those who baptize infants are don't have have any Scruples about doing it on the eighth day and of
9:03
course baptism applies equally to women as men so actually no one I don't know that anyone says it continues circumcision is
9:19
doneer uh yeah we're okay maybe okay maybe but that's not what's said because Passover belong belonged to Israel it
9:31
was a commemoration of the of the Exodus and and so it didn't belong to the Gentiles so continuing it would run into problems right it it was a it was a
9:43
physical deliverance from Egypt and and to spiritualize it into a spiritual deliverance from sin which you can do with Passover itself but with the
9:55
feast you got to do a lot of gymnastics that nobody's done at least that I've encountered so it's it's it is it they use the word replacement okay just it's
10:07
replaced and I'm going to um Christ they had Wasing the Passover supper okay yeah we're going to get to
10:17
that it was obviously during the Passover supper although to get back to a very controversial point that I've made over time and have upset people John's account of the Passover is not
10:28
the same as the synoptics and I did encounter a verse that I wish I had had in my mind when we talked about it last but do you remember
10:39
when the priests who had arrested Jesus came to came to pilate they would not enter the palace why so that they might be able to to eat
10:53
the Passover the priests had not yet eaten the Passover and yet Jesus was in their hand hands so it it it's it's fairly strong
11:06
and there are quite a number like like uh BF Westcott who's highly regarded scholar um that the meal that Jesus ate was not the actual 14th of
11:19
Nissan it was the day before because again the next day the priest would not go into the palace they would not even go into the precincts because that would have defiled them and prevented them as
11:30
the text says from meeting the Passover so the issue of Jesus having a pass I I know that's that you shake your head I understand but you you do have the Johan
11:43
account and then you have the synoptic accounts and they ain't the same okay so they're just not the same and whe you know deal you know people have been
11:54
dealing with that for a long long time to not deal with it is just to stick your head in the sand because I guarantee you the liberal unbeliever is going to point it out that they are they are clearly different
12:06
accounts of what is obviously the same thing so you kind of wrestle with it and and that's what I try to do is wrestle with it um but the point being is that's
12:16
not the point of tonight's discussion the point the point is Jesus observed the last supper at Passover that was the venue of his death
12:29
because he was the Passover Lamb right by saying the Passover then becomes the Lord's Supper may be confusing venue for
12:49
intent he had the Last Supper because it was the last supper and he was about to be broken on the cross and shed his blood okay that's the venue Passover he is the Passover Lamb
12:59
that does not mean that the Lord's Supper replaces Passover that's all I'm saying okay we can't deny that he is it says in 1 Corinthians 5:7 Christ Our
13:10
Passover has been sacrificed okay so I'm not you know don't get me wrong I'm not diminishing Passover or the fact that God has has overlooked our sin and
13:21
delivered us from bondage of sin Passover and The Exodus still have tremendous meaning to Paul and should to us us the question here is just like
13:32
does baptism replace circumcision does the Lord's Supper replace Passover okay that that's the question again not again not to diminish the
13:44
importance of circumcision in its day or the importance of circumcision to the Jews only to ask whether this Reformation practice of replacing one Old Testament ritual with a new
13:56
testament one is that really valid is is that hermeneutic actually sticking to the word to what we what we read or are we making
14:07
associations Christ instituted the Lord's supper at Passover therefore the Lord's Supper replaces Passover is that a a valid necessary
14:19
conclusion no there's a there's a very powerful reason why it was done on this Passover because he was about to be sacrificed that does not
14:31
mean that one replaces the other that's what I'm what I'm maintaining tonight is that that that's not really so uh again going to our you know we have the Lord's
14:51
right yeah we don't need a new one it's done that that's that's really where I'm heading is that to take one and and what that
15:02
does is it clouds the meaning of the Lord's supper we're we're not able to understand the Lord's Supper because we're associating it with a completely
15:14
different and fully completed Old Testament ritual okay and we say okay well we're commemorating but that's not exactly we're not commemorating the
15:25
exodus yes we're commemorating the death of Christ of Christ and in that respect of course he is the Passover Lamb but there's so much more to
15:36
communion to the Lord's Supper because it actually I'm kind of giving away the punchline it actually more strongly reflects the peace offering than it does
15:47
the Passover the Passover seder that's why we're talking about it because we're in the midst of the in Leviticus 7even we're in the midst of the peace offerings and again I think this is one of the strongest
15:57
applications uh of the peace offer offering so um Robert Lewis Dabney uh one of the most notable reformed
16:08
theologians of the 19th century a southern Presbyterian um he writes I hold that the Savior undoubtedly held his last passover on
16:20
the regular Passover evening and that this ordinance intended by him to supersede and replace the Passover was very quietly introduced at its close
16:32
the close of the Passover seder okay so that's uh Yuri that's what I'm that mean that's standard reform language that it supersedes and replaces the
16:46
Passover but in order for it to to logically follow within the Systematic Theology it still has to have the same signific uh sign
16:59
it needs to signify the same thing I'm sorry my tongue got tangled there um just as as baptism is now the sign of the New Covenant just as circumcision
17:10
was of the old the Lord's Supper is the New Testament Passover and that's what it's called okay so even though it is
17:20
superseded and replaced the language as I just read from the that hymn the language is still there the language of Passover still Passover still uh adheres to the observation of the
17:33
Lord's Supper but this wasn't always the case and I think we need to keep in mind you know we we hear from a lot of reformers modern reformed
17:45
theologians that we ought not question the reformers because you know it's been 500 years well when the reformers came around it had been a thousand years okay
17:58
there still halfway there it was over I mean from the Roman Catholic perspective what the reformers were overturning was twice as old as what we might want to
18:09
overturn from the 16th century so that's not a valid argument age I mean falsehood does not get better with age
18:19
it's not cheese it's not wine it's not true and so we we should never accept anything because of its Antiquity that's just tradition that's not truth so looking at
18:33
these things we may conclude you know they were right and often times that is what we what we conclude uh we were talking Sunday morning in the sermon about you know the essence of reformed theology is that
18:44
salvation is of the Lord they got that right the Salvation is not of the church it's not of the priest it's not of the Pope it's entirely of God through Jesus Christ they got that right 500 600 years
18:56
later that's not going to change because that's all okay that's what we need to go back to is we need to go back to the scriptures to see if these things are so Dabney actually references in his
19:09
text 1 Corinthians 5:7 Christ Our Passover is sacrificed okay and that is a a standard text
19:21
because it's the only place where that is actually stated so we have this text
19:56
the congregation this is the chapter where we have the sin that even the Gentiles don't do this is the chapter where we read that if a so-called brother
20:08
so-called believer acts in certain ways you're not even to eat with such a one in other words he's not talking about the Lord's supper at all in fact he's
20:18
not going to get to the Lord's Supper for another five chapters okay so he says Christ Our Passover is sacrific absolutely true but what does that have to do with the Lord's Supper
20:29
well contextually nothing okay there see see the associations made because the Lord's Supper was instituted at the Passover so all we have to say is 1
20:41
Corinthians 5:7 and that you know all argument goes away what about context he says take out the leaven the leaven was sin within the
20:51
congregation now when he deals with the Lord's Supper later on in chapters 10 and 11 there's other problemss in the congregation although he doesn't use the word leaven and doesn't mention the
21:02
Passover at all so when he's talking about the Lord's Supper he doesn't mention the Passover or even allude to it that's a completely different context you can't take that one little
21:14
proof verse and then use it everywhere you want to defend your replacement Sacrament and you know with all due respect to
21:26
respect to Dabney that's not valid exog Jesus that's using a passage out of context to prove a point that you have
21:37
already concluded is true so I think we have to look deeper into this and see that what we're dealing with here in terms of when the Lord's Supper was
21:49
observed and instituted is what we might call circumstantial call circumstantial evidence now what is circumstantial
22:00
evidence it it is evidence that doesn't necessarily apply to the Judgment right so um you you happen to
22:12
be at the intersection of Pleasantburg and Rutherford when something happens does that mean that you maliciously planned to participate in this this Naro
22:24
well thing no it was circumstantial you just happened to be things that it was a circumstance that that just happened and when that's determined circumstantial evidence is
22:34
not to be weighed against the verdict so it may be indeed circumstantial evidence circumstantial evidence um the connection between Passover and
22:46
the Lord's Supper may be far more circumstantial than many believe that Christ was to die at Passover makes sense prophetically that he instituted his supper at that last meal makes sense
22:58
Chron logically but is not necessarily but not necessarily theologically and that sentence that little Clause needs to be Rewritten the Passover was to be
23:09
observed annually and only annually the supper was to be observed quote whenever you do this and the early church from all evidence that we have
23:20
observed the Lord's Supper weekly okay now the Scottish Presbyterian Church has gone to an ual communion season which in their minds
23:31
would be the logical development of viewing the Lord's Supper as the New Testament Passover you do it during you do it once a year and they do it basically when Passover is in the spring
23:44
that's that's really taking the replacement sacrament to its extreme when there's no historical basis in the church's history for an annual
23:56
observance of the Lord's Supper okay so that I I think that's I don't know how they justify that in their own mind but if we the Passover was a was a
24:08
sacrifice of atonement performed by the priests but eaten by the families in their homes the Lord's Supper is a communal meal and it was early recognized as such
24:21
actually there's no evidence of private communion household communion in the early church the idea of of taking the bread and the wine to shuttin you
24:33
know I don't know if you've heard that you know that people elderly or you know they we they take or I remember this from early you know early in our marriage when they would take the bread
24:44
in the wine to the nursery workers oh yeah I've really examined myself I've examined diapers I've examined but anything I've not examined is myself and if I do at that point I'm not going to
24:54
partake okay you they they would bring it in as if we're supposed to drop everything while I'm holding a baby I'm not going to drop and and take this was a Church of Christ and they believe the
25:06
communion maintains your salvation so that there were deacons who would take the communion to the elderly of the congregation they they called them the shut-ins right there is no evidence of
25:19
private communion in the in in either the New Testament or in the early the first centuries of the church if you read First Corinthians 11 it is clearly a public communal meal of
25:32
the Community of Faith and so it's a lot different than the Passover I mean the Passover was family just family okay and it was done in the
25:48
home when I was in Ohio I went to Independent Baptist church and they did a communion every month like many Independent Baptist Church for
25:58
some reason up there they came together with all the likeminded churches in the area on Good Friday a good Friday yes and then like area
26:11
wi but it was an independent bobes yeah I don't know why they would why they would do that um probably just to Foster Fellowship among the the different
26:22
churches although they probably didn't do anything together the rest of the year okay I I don't know there obviously some significance to doing that but I don't know I don't know what that would be I couldn't think of anything
26:34
scripturally to to justify that um so um the
26:56
circumstances the circumstances of associating the Lord's supper with Pastor over the circumstances of the Lord's Supper being instituted at
27:06
Passover factored in very neatly to what the reformers were doing here and and what they were doing is fairly clear in their writing because
27:16
they spend you know you look at Calvin's institutes for example or you look at uh Dabney systematics or anything older than that and you find far more ink
27:29
spilled in argument against what Rome is doing than in defense of what we are proposing and it's very the the section
27:40
on what the Lord's Supper means is okay then they go right into does the bread turn into the flesh you know and they go against transubstantiation you know and they go
27:51
against the withholding of of the cup and you know all this writing is polemic it was very polemic they were going against what Rome was teaching and therefore they really weren't giving a
28:03
positive instruction on the Lord's supper at all several differents one was just that seems like saath and Sunday are the sameas issu well
28:14
yes yeah okay let's put that up
28:24
there all seems part of covenant theology of God
28:39
right thinking about the strong anti-semitic Str through so much of centuries of Christian theology I'm not sure I can put it into words but this idea of just every
28:51
Christian institution is just bam a replac of a Jewish one the better one yeah that that's ESS replacement theology I I feel we can't IGN the undercurrents of anti-Semitism
29:05
certainly not yeah certainly not with the in the 17th century uh and certainly not within the the German Reformed Church although it's it's pervasive in England as well I don't know how bad Calvin was in terms of his relationship
29:17
with Jews um but the ways in which centuries of thinking in that way even if you feel like you're not personally antii or anything how that has shaped
29:28
Christian perspectives on the Old Testament and how the New Testament relates to it yeah we're we're all the children of of replacement theology that
29:38
the church has replaced Israel and so when we do read our Old Testaments which is not often and we read of the Passover we we see how important it was to Israel
29:49
and we want to apply that to our lives and so we we essentially oh look here we have the Lord's supper and it was instituted did it Passover how convenient and we don't think about the
30:01
Passover anymore we just say the Lord's Supper has replaced it it it's almost by edict by Fiat again uh if you consider
30:11
baptism and you consider circumcision they're so completely different it's very hard to make a connection between the two except for a
30:22
passage in Colossians in which they're mentioned in the same section okay uh without Paul saying this replaces that but there it is it's okay
30:36
so um I I call this special pleading they they have an they have an agenda we have agendas when we approach the scriptures we do so um with the the issues of our
30:48
current day in our minds and so you'll hear a lot of sermons either for or against the um the the woke movement uh tolerance um same-sex marriages we you
31:01
know we do hermeneutics we do exegesis in the days in which we live we can't and it's only future Generations that can look back and see the bias that we
31:13
weren't able to see at the time okay so I mean we we're operating with a bias now that we won't recognize and I don't think the reformers necessarily recognize their bias we can't understand
31:25
what they were coming out of I mean to give them credit you know they were coming out of yes a thousand years but at at least 400 years of Corruption of
31:37
Christian doctrine and practice in in a horr the Roman Catholic institution from the 13th century on you know was just horrible for the most part and they were
31:48
coming out of that well you know sometimes we're doing that coming out of a denomination but it hasn't been 400 years I was going to say some of them were were monks and Prest
31:58
brought up in that in that it's like I have to do something to attract people yeah you know my mind any when I see these kind of things I think of talk
32:09
investment in the building the structure and we have that to we have that today with the mega churches they they become self- sustaining or or self uh needing to sustain uh organization organisms
32:22
that the message doesn't matter anymore what matters is keeping the lights on keeping the dynamic going and there are now uh stories of you know of people
32:32
almost like people who have escaped Cults you know now there are books you can buy of people who have escaped mega churches you know so yeah that that's their context and so I give them credit
32:43
for that but looking back on it I think we can see that they did have an agenda Ain you call this a repl theology is
32:57
thaty it it's actually a subset of Covenant theology it
33:09
is not really no no there wasn't really much discussion about um about the dis except well no they they had baptism baptism actually washed away original sin it's just that the Catholic church seems to resemble like Jewish priesthood
33:23
yes yes yeah but they didn't really to my knowledge they didn't spend a whole lot of time you know I not for example I have not read all of aquinus Suma you
33:35
know uh and I have no intention of doing so um but what I have read I I really haven't encountered much interaction that they'll allude to an Old Testament passage or Prophet or event they knew
33:48
their Bibles but they would use them more as illustration to what it is they're now doing because keep in mind that as you know took the 19 Century for
33:59
John Henry Newman to basically describe the development of Doctrine Theory and he was simply giving a philosophy of Roman Catholic history
34:10
that with the Holy Spirit now indwelling the church you have an organic growth and evolution of evolution of Doctrine okay this is tradition which by
34:22
the very definition of development takes the place of scripture Newman use the analogy of the acorn and the oak tree that what we have in the New Testament is the acorn what
34:34
we have in the the church and Newman was an Anglican who then converted to Catholicism for which they made him a cardinal okay um and and so he kind of
34:48
gave the apology the defense of that development and evolution so what happened in the past is relegated to illustration and example
35:00
not to the foundation of Doctrine why were the reformers try to it tie it together um they they they did I mean they were also in the word they were in their Bibles and they recognized
35:12
that the that the the Catholic tradition had um had clearly abandoned solid ex aesus of scripture uh what started the Reformation in Zurich was simply ul's
35:25
wingley getting into the pulpit one Sunday morning and beginning to preach exegetically starting in Matthew
35:36
1:1 nobody had done that for as long as anybody could remember so just going back to the word and then they publish commentaries after commentaries Old Testament New Testament so they were definitely in the word uh they were also
35:47
benefited from uh the the um uh the rediscovery of Greek manuscripts and arasmus is New Testament but also um
35:58
some of them were not were not too proud to uh to learn Hebrew and and to go back to you know to associate with the Jewish scriptures which meant associating with
36:08
the Jews of their Community now that was not something that Calvin or Luther did but but others did that so they were this was this was the result of the idea
36:19
from The Ref from the Renaissance at Fontes which means to the sources to the Fountain go back to the
36:30
sources uh that was something you know so okay they but they also had the pical issue of baking that break with Rome so it was kind of a positive and
36:43
negative amalgamation of motives that worked in and and I'm as I said I think we all suffer from this to some degree and again it will only be
36:53
future Generations that'll look back and see our biases but you know they they were in the word they they read Leviticus they studied Leviticus Calvin
37:04
did a Harmony of the of the uh pendok especially the books of the law Exodus through Deuteronomy um you know and he wrote a lot of commentaries and they were incredibly intelligent and
37:15
scholarly men I don't want to to diminish their contribution but I do think that their Association of the Lord's supper with Passover was tendent
37:28
test coincidental I having trouble with words tonight I'm
37:52
Tous okay well yes I mean Newman again Newman gave the apology kind of like Justin Martyr in the second century have John Henry Newman and his first apology of Roman Catholic evolution evolutionary Doctrine my question is Ian I
38:24
whatever uh my experience is that the reformed people just dig in their heels and say this this is this is really this is the this is shth this is how you say it they they don't bother with any new
38:34
except maybe Calvin you know but you know they just and that's why I said about um you know I know this is this is on videotape but uh you know frankly I I think Michael Horton who's actually
38:45
younger than me um is is kind of the um reformed Bulldog of Our Generation and you they don't there there's not much in the the
38:57
way of flexibility of thought within the reformed camp today not not at all it's mostly uh mostly uh Echoes but not not a lot and if and if
39:07
you say something differently you know you they don't call in Newman they just call you out noer you're not truly reformed and and yeah you'll you'll if
39:20
you keep it up you'll get the HW rown at you pretty quickly Yuri it's a noble idea to go back to the sources but you still need to interpret the
39:30
sources right and that's they also develop having go back to the sources especially Calvin he does develop a hermeneutic not not so much Luther but Calvin does develop somewhat of a of a
39:42
how do we actually do this um and then that becomes part of the reformed tradition is the the hermeneutics of biblical exegesis and so um but it
39:54
emphasizes continuity emphasizes continuity um whereas dispensationalism emphasizes discontinuity reformed theology covenantal theology represent or um
40:06
emphasizes continuity and so this is where you get replacement theology the church has replaced Israel and within that well that means okay Passover was
40:16
the was the main meal the main celebration of their deliverance from Egypt therefore the Lord's Supper is that meal to us just like okay circumcision is a sign of of the
40:27
Covenant okay baptism and because baptism is the sign of the Covenant circumcision was given to infants therefore we baptize infants you know okay this is these are non
40:37
sequitors when you look at the premises the conclusion doesn't follow or need not follow again as we said earlier Jesus instituted the Lord's supper at
40:49
the Passover that does not necessitate that the Lord's Supper replace the Passover it might but it is not a necessary
41:01
conclusion as Horton and Dabney that's stretching a be about 140 years you know as they maintain that it does like with baptism and
41:12
baptism and circumcision relationship between isbl idea of one replacing the other does not follow from their association
41:24
with one another right right exactly they they they do not they they do not have the same um
41:35
intent meaning they actually do not have the same meaning either baptism or the Lord's Supper do not have the same meaning as circumcision and the Passover
41:45
Lewis burkoff who agrees um entirely pretty much in the whole he um agrees that agrees that the Lord's Supper is the replacement for
41:57
the Passover he writes this he says of these sacrifices he's really describing
42:07
um of these sacrifices only the fat adhering to the inward inwards was consumed on the altar the wave breast was given to the priesthood and the heave shoulder was given to the officiating priest while the rest constituted a sacrificial meal for the
42:19
offerer and his friends provided they were levitic levitic clean these meals taught in a symbolic way that being justified by faith we have peace with
42:30
God through our Lord Jesus Christ we talked last week about the peace offerings assumed the condition of peace and if that condition were not there it
42:42
needed to be brought about before the peace offering could be offered and I said last week I think that when Jesus says if you come to present your gift at the altar and you and your brother has
42:52
ought against you I think he's talking about the peace offering because no other offering applies to what Jesus is saying there but the peace offering that's the gift you're bringing your gift that's
43:03
the votive or the free will or the thank offering those are the only ones that can be remotely called gifts and yet if the condition of Peace both with God and
43:14
with your with your brother is not established then your peace offering will be an affront to God and not
43:25
accepted so let me finish this a then I'll call on you these meals taught in a symbolic way okay they were expressive of the fact that on the basis of offered and accepted
43:36
and accepted sacrifice the burnt offering the guilt offering the sin offering okay on the basis of offered and accepted sacrifice God receives his people as guests in his
43:47
house and unites with them in joyful communion the communal life of the Covenant spot on and he's just describe
43:57
the Lord's the Lord's Supper I was wondering if it wouldn't be appropriate to see Passover meal itself as theace offering EXC I me the entire
44:09
congregation together except except they did it privately in their homes well no I I I realized that but I I guess I'm just thinking of how it was the entire
44:19
family and it it is so pervasive throughout the congregation except that um none of the Lamb was offered up to the Lord there's a significant difference
44:31
between the Passover meal and the peace offering in fact that's what I why I I I mean Ian I I I basically just Associated
44:41
the two the Lord's supper and Passover I mean that's just what we're what we're always taught it's what we sing in our hymns that we then you realize this isn't anything like the Passover okay the offering of it that
44:53
the lamb was slain but then the whole thing was taken back it there was no mention in the Passover of any of it being offered up to the Lord even after the Tabernacle was established and they
45:03
continued to observe the Passover they did not have it was not a peace offering in other words the mechanics were not there the Torah of the offering was not there so um that's you know it's it's
45:16
it's it's a different thing okay like the feasts those three they're a different thing and because they're a different thing you know they the Passover was the Jews
45:27
thing this was Israel's feast and even though I firmly believe that the Gentiles have been grafted in that does not make our history the same
45:40
as their history my ancesters did not pass through the Red Sea okay maybe the Straits of Messina but you know not the Red Sea okay
45:52
so we we can't um we we can't replace place the Church of Israel with the church to the point where Israel's
46:02
history becomes our history it becomes Our Heritage but not our history so that it's it's a spirit of adoption we've been grafted in we've
46:13
been adopted now an adopted child if I adopt a child he has my Heritage he has my legacy but he doesn't have my history
46:24
you can't just rewrite history is I guess what I'm saying so when Paul is the Apostle to the Gentiles is he going to is going to export the Passover to
46:37
the Gentiles well he doesn't have to and I don't think he would even I if he had to there would have been something very evident that I don't think is there concerning the connection between the
46:48
Passover and the Lord's Supper but as we mentioned last mentioned last week the temple meal was already a common phenomenon among the pagan Nations they had their peace offerings
47:00
they had their Thanksgiving feasts the the Feast of Israel in terms of the peace offering would not have been any type of um of
47:12
um of aberration from the Pagan except now of course it's Yahweh it is the one true God and of course the sacrifice of
47:22
Christ is the Once for all sacrifice so there's major importance differences but structurally and mechanically the food sacrificed to sacrificed to Idols is categorically the
47:36
same as the sacrifice of the peace offering on the altar because some of it was sacrificed to the deity the rest of it was a feast for the observant and his
47:48
family and friends okay so um the connection I think again is just entirely circum circumstantial but what what really gets me is that when you go back to the earliest
48:04
writings the the the first non-biblical name that we encounter in encounter in terms of the Lord's
48:24
use it's the Eucharist ah that Catholic upbringing is coming back that they that they stole yeah they well yeah I mean what
48:36
does the word mean Thanksgiving Thanksgiving okay it's just Greek for for giving thanks all right but this is what the Lord's Supper was earliest this was the earliest title given to the meal
48:49
to the feast that was observed every Lord's day okay that's attested to even by uh plyy the younger in his letter to
48:59
the emperor Tran at the end of the of the first century so very early on we have extra biblical evidence as well as Christian writings showing that this
49:11
this was a this was a major weekly observance of the church normally followed by a feast sometimes called the Agape Feast it's what we see in 1
49:22
Corinthians 11 in its abuse okay um and and and it was called the Eucharist so the emphasis as perceived by the
49:33
earliest Christians was on Thanksgiving okay not Passover not even atonement but
49:45
Thanksgiving okay so I think that's that's very uh significant because these These Are The Heirs of the Apostles uh some of them directly
49:57
like Clement of of Rome okay we we read of a himym in Romans 16 okay so um so looking at some the the D the teaching of the twel uh mid like 145 ad 145 Mid 2
50:12
Century uh speaks of the Lord's Supper in a manner quite reminiscent of the thank offering adding an element of communion that is quite possibly an illusion to the sin and guilt offerings
50:23
here's the quote on every Lord's day his special day come together and break bread and give thanks first confessing your sins so that your sacrifi sacrifice
50:34
may be pure anyone at variance with his neighbor must not join you until they are reconciled lest your sacrifice be defiled does not sound like Passover at
50:46
all but it sounds very much like the peace offering okay um further on uh it gives an early example of the Lord's Supper as a
50:56
Eucharist a Thanksgiving meal there's a form of prayer given and and it's interesting the the bishop or the president of the congregation was to give the give the prayer a prophet could pray however he
51:09
wanted okay and it actually says that now he also says elsewhere that a prophet can stay two days but not three if he stays three he's false okay all
51:21
right all right so don't take it to your head pro now about the Eucharist this is how to give thanks we thank you our father for the holy Vine of David your child which you have revealed through
51:31
Jesus your child to you be glory forever then in connection with the peace the broken off the loaf we thank you our father for the life and the knowledge which you have revealed through Jesus
51:42
your child to you be glory forever as this piece of bread was scattered over the hills and then brought together and made one so let your church be brought together from the ends of the Earth into
51:54
your kingdom for yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever there is no mention of The Exodus here in fact there's there's no mention of the Forgiveness of sins now I'm not
52:05
saying that there shouldn't be I'm just saying that you know in the second century the later development of associating the Lord's supper with the
52:15
Passover is not in evidence okay it it is very much not um I mentioned Justin Martyr he writes but we after we have thus washed him this is a a new convert
52:28
who has been convinced and ascended to our teaching bring him to the place where those who are called Brethren are assembled in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves
52:38
and for the baptized person and for all others in every place that we may be counted worthy now that we have learned the truth by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of The
52:49
Commandments so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation having ended the prayers we salute one another with a kiss there is then brought to the president of the Brethren bread and a
53:01
cup of wine mixed with water and he taking them gives praise and glory to the father of the universe through the name of the son and of the Holy Ghost and offers thanks at considerable length
53:13
for our being counted worthy to receive these things at his hands and when he has concluded the prayers and Thanksgiving all the people Express their Ascent by saying
53:23
amen this word amen answers in the Hebrew language to Gano so be it and when the president had given thanks and all the people have expressed their
53:34
Ascent those who were called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the Thanksgiving was pronounced and to those who are absent
53:44
we carry away a portion okay so the first shut-ins were ministered to in the early 2 Century that's been around a long time uh probably to the nursery
53:54
workers too um so in your notes you you have several examples of first and 2 Century evidence that the the Eucharist was emphasizing
54:07
the key theme of The Lord's supper and that was Thanksgiving it was a Thanksgiving feast okay now now I imagine that
54:17
faithful Jews on the night of the Passover were very thankful that their firstborns didn't firstborns didn't die but it's it's hard to call the Passover a Thanksgiving feast
54:28
okay you can be thankful for it but it's not a Thanksgiving feast and yet we have one that is expressly called a Thanksgiving it's one
54:39
of the three peace offerings was the Thanksgiving offering so the emphasis here again fits better with the peace offering than it does to the
54:52
Passover now turning to Paul we have number of places where you can see um a
55:04
um a connection between the the significance of the Lord's supper and that is to commemorate this do in remembrance of me right this is my body which is broken
55:15
for you this is my blood which is shed for you well that's the cross right and what did the cross do according to Paul we think well the cross forgave my sin
55:27
well yes but that's not how Paul words it in a number of different places to Paul the
55:48
this now of course in order to get there as with the peace offering your sins needed to be atoned for so this is not minimizing atonement for sin and forgiveness of sin it's that that's not where it stops Paul doesn't stop there
55:59
so much of Christian preaching stops there your sins are forgiven you go to heaven when you die no listen again Romans 5 and I'm going I'm going to go ahead and read several of these
56:09
therefore having been justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ Colossians
56:34
20 for it was the father's good pleasure that for all the fullness to dwell in him and through him to reconcile all things to himself this is also second Corinthians 5 having made peace through
56:45
the blood of his cross through him I say whether things on earth or things in heaven Ephesians chapter 2 and this is just a theme that runs
56:56
runs throughout these are just a few selections but starting in verse 14 for he himself is our peace who made both groups into one and broke down the
57:07
barrier of the dividing wall by abolishing in his flesh the enmity which is the law of Commandments contained in ordinances that he in himself he might
57:18
make the two into one new man thus establishing peace and might reconcile them both in one body to God Through The Cross by having put to death the enmity
57:31
Through The Cross by his shed blood okay by his blood this is the Lord's Supper even though he doesn't mention it when you when you tie and harmonize Paul's
57:43
theologic his his soteriology together the the key result to Paul of the the victory of Christ on the cross and
57:54
through the grave was peace with God that condition of peace that we now stand in having been sealed by the holy spirit this is so much more than just
58:06
having our sins forgiven so this is a peace offering okay not not Passover Aaron you look like you have I guess that's why
58:17
he's called The Prince of Peace yes peace with God yes but he div God but that peace with God will result
58:30
in peace among men peace on Earth and Good Will toward men okay so it it's it's both it's first vertical okay it's got to be which is why all of the atonement sacrifices come before the
58:41
peace offering and even the ones that are horizontal your brother has ought against you well yeah I defrauded him okay I got to make restitution I got to make a sacrifice I got to pay back what
58:52
I owe plus 20% Then I'm in a condition of peace with Yahweh and I can bring a Thanksgiving offering I can bring a votive offering but they're not
59:03
acceptable if atonement is required if a if a sin has been made known and you do not atone for it through the appropriate sacrifice then you don't bring and again
59:14
I said last week I think that was Cain's error I think he was bringing a peace offering and abble was bringing a sin offering had had Cain done it right
59:24
which God's response to Cain implies that Cain knew the right way to walk and didn't walk in it okay so
59:36
um going on then what then is Passover what what are these what is what I I meant to say what is the Lord's Supper but also in that is what what is
59:47
Passover does the Lord's Supper signify an signify an exodus okay so let's look at at this what does the Lord's