The Lord’s Supper Part 17

Not often mentioned but very important in the understanding of the Supper is that Jesus taught the Lord’s Supper a ratification- proof of the NEW CONVENANT. NO covenant could be ratified-established-bound-brought-proved to be in existence without “the shedding of blood”!! Something innocent had to die!! The sacrifice that brought this Supper into existence, made from the foundations of the world, was not an animal, not just a human, not an spirit-only-angel—it was one who possessed the nature called God. The message of Jesus was “I have to die” or the Old Testament Covenant will not be annulled. Romans 7:4 says; “We have become dead to the Law by the body of Christ that we should be married to another, even to Him whom God raised from the dead.” Christ was shown in pattern/type in the marriages of Jacob. Having two wives, Jacob only loved Rachel for whom he worked twice the length of time to have as his own. The marriages to Leah and Rachel pre-pictured the marriages of the Christ. The woman less-loved had all the children, again picturing that all was pre-determined. A new picture was introduced, Christ would not have TWO wives! It was prophetically shown that no one could stay in the first marriage, There would be no two wives, two marriages, two families—one of these had to be “taken out of the way.” That the Church of Christ was considered double perfection by God, Jacob worked a second 7 years for her hand. (One thing is interesting, a little inside information, Leah knew she was not the “loved”!!)
For a covenant to be perfected, something had to die!! The message of Jesus all the time He was here in His earthly ministry, was exactly that—“I will die”. “Jesus said unto them, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” John 2:19; 3:14. A covenant is of force AFTER the man who made it is dead!! The BLOOD is not the covenant, the covenant is NOT the blood. Moses sprinkled blood ON the COVENANT AND MADE THE COVENANT BINDING. Christ had to present the BLOOD to God the Father and He chose a “cup, container, body” to be that container. If the blood was the covenant, could Moses sprinkle the covenant on the covenant?? God demanded BLOOD to make a covenant binding. Like the covenant written on stone, the NEW Covenant would not be binding UNTIL the blood was offered. The BLOOD OFFERED AND ACCEPTED made the covenant binding!! The blood was offered 53 days AFTER it was shed!! It was on the day of Pentecost, 53 days after Christ had been crucified that the new covenant came down from God out of Heaven that the apostles declared!! Christ dying blood (not His body) served to establish a new religious institution. We declare-teach-proclaim the establishment of the New Covenant EVERYTIME (in a cup) we partake of the Lord’s Supper. The New Covenant being established by His blood, how can some say He is not King of the Kingdom and partake of these emblems??
The expression “this is” refers to the drink element contained IN the cup, not the cup itself. The cup was the manner of means, the way God had determined to present His blood. For your consideration, I tell you His body was His cup presented first on earth and then before all who were present in Heaven. If the “cup” is the manner of means and all things that hold the blood of the everlasting covenant is described as a “cup,” this changes the perspective that a lot of people have about Christ prayer in Gethsemanae!! “Let this ‘cup,’ pass from Me” could be explained as “let Me shed this body”!! This fits everything Jesus had said about His dying. His task would be complete then, and He could then GO HOME, and “set down to reign”!!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet

Add comment