PAUL'S TEACHING BEARING ON THE LORD'S SUPPER
PAUL’S TEACHING BEARING ON THE LORD’S SUPPER
JT The bearing of Paul’s teaching on the Lord’s supper is in mind. It is hoped that from what we may say it may be more clearly understood that Paul’s doctrine is intended to bear on Christianity, and especially on the Lord’s supper. In Acts 2 those that were convened, a large number, were said to have “persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers”, Acts 2:42. And in subsequent remarks it is said they were “breaking bread in the house”, over against the temple; but now it is different. Paul having come in, his word must be accepted in all things, especially in relation to the Lord’s supper, and the relation it has to the assembly. The verses read here indicate that before the breaking of bread took place, Paul discoursed at length and spoke with the brethren, and then they broke bread, as if his truth, his doctrine, should be understood before they actually broke bread. It cannot be assumed that there had been no breaking of bread before, with the company that waited for him in Troas, and all the days they had there; it cannot be assumed there was no breaking of bread, but the wording shows that what the apostle says must be heard before the Lord’s supper occurred, and this gives rise to, and enters into, the Lord’s supper and the celebration and order of it, and that Paul’s word was to be made way for. “And the first day of the week, we being assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed to them, about to depart on the morrow”, so that his place in the ministry clearly is the primary one. Also another question arises, as to [p. 191] how we are to be viewed, and under what name we are to be regarded as assembling to break bread.
Ques What do you imply as to the name by which we are to be regarded?
JT What we are. The antecedent here is “the disciples” from verse 1, which reads, “But after the tumult had ceased, Paul having called the disciples to [him] and embraced [them], went away to go to Macedonia”, and this thought runs down to the verse we began reading, “we being assembled”.
Ques Do we have to regard Paul’s doctrine before we can take the Lord’s supper properly; the gospel accounts are not enough?
JT The gospels take a secondary place to the apostle Paul’s doctrine. If Paul had not been there, it would have been the twelve apostles only, and yet Peter could hardly have done it; his work was for the house and for the kingdom. Then there is the designation applying to “the first day of the week” when we assemble.
Ques Is the thought of ‘assembling’ normal to ‘disciples’?
JT Just so. “Assembled” is found in the first chapter as to the Lord Jesus “being assembled with [them], commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to await the promise of the Father, which said he ye have heard of me”, Acts 1:4, as if the Lord Himself would be there and indicate how things were to be done. And the formal term ‘disciples’ comes into verse 1 of our chapter; it implies those willing to be taught.
Rem . They are called by Paul to receive his embrace.
JT Yes. The idea of love characterises the whole chapter.
Ques Is this kind of love to be found among us at the present time?
JT Yes; we are to “have love amongst yourselves”, John 13:35.
Rem The disciples had no part in the tumult in chapter 19; they would be sympathetic with Paul.
JT Yes. So he calls them to him and embraces them, and then at the end of the chapter it says “they ardently kissed him”. Verse 37 reads, “And they all wept sore; and falling upon the neck of Paul they ardently kissed him ‘(covered him with kisses, see note)’, specially pained by the word which he had said, that they would no more see his face. And they went down with him to the ship”. It shows the holy, happy, respectful relations that existed between him and the disciples. The whole chapter is a consolation to him, especially at Ephesus in view of his leaving; it was an apostolic departure, involving the removal of his influence, as when he was with them he had authority with them. So the earlier verses show that he had in mind the persons who accompanied him, not only the persons but his work, “And there accompanied him as far as Asia, Sopater son of Pyrrhus, a Berean; and of Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus, and Gaius and Timotheus of Derbe, and of Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus”, (verse 4), all were the outcome of his own work; they were intensely interested in what he was doing; the breaking of bread was in mind. “These going before waited for us in Troas; but we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and we came to them to Troas in five days, where we spent seven days. And the first day of the week, we being assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed to them, about to depart on the morrow”. We are not told what he said, but they would all be affected by it, and the conversational way he spoke. “And he prolonged the discourse till midnight. And there were many lights in the upper room where we were assembled. And a certain youth, by name Eutychus, sitting at the window-opening,
[p. 193] overpowered by deep sleep, while Paul discoursed very much at length, having been overpowered by the sleep, fell from the third storey down to the bottom, and was taken up dead. But Paul descending fell upon him, and enfolding [him] [in his arms], said, Be not troubled, for his life is in him. And having gone up, and having broken the bread, and eaten, land having long spoken until daybreak, so he went away. And they brought [away] the boy alive, and were no little comforted”. It was love operating to comfort the saints.
Ques What would be the difference between the “discoursing” of verse 9 and the “long spoken” of verse 11?
JT One is discourse; it would be more lengthy, like an address; but conversation is that more than one is speaking, like Malachi 3:16, “Then they that feared Jehovah spoke often one to another”. Conversational ministry can be classed as readings. Whether they had them is a question, but certainly they had something of the kind. At Glasgow we had these conversational meetings.
Ques Would such occasions have in mind bringing the authority of the holy Scriptures to stop the inroads of false doctrine?
JT So they persevered in the apostles’ doctrine, not in that of Moses and the prophets.
Rem There was nothing in the Old Testament that they could refer to.
JT Just so. The apostles were outstanding at the beginning; there was no allusion to the Old Testament, it was the apostles’ teaching, whatever it may have been.
Rem The truth goes via Peter to Paul, and via Paul and Timothy to us.
JT Paul stresses that what he taught, the Lord warranted, that He had given him that place. No other had it, and so in order to get the truth we must
[p. 194] consult Paul, especially as to the Lord’s supper, and thus Paul would have the place that once Peter had in the minds of the saints.
Ques Is Paul’s epistle to the Corinthians basic?
JT Yes; especially so.
Ques Is there any reason why it is here about the Lord’s supper in a section running on to Ephesus and the whole counsel of God?
JT I would say that; so verse 22 says, “And now, behold, bound in my spirit I go to Jerusalem, not knowing what things shall happen to me in it; only that the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city, saying that bonds and tribulations await me. But I make no account of [my] life [as] dear to myself, so that I finish my course, and the ministry which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the glad tidings of the grace of God. And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone about preaching the kingdom [of God], shall see my face no more. Wherefore I witness to you this day, that I am clean from the blood of all, for I have not shrunk from announcing to you all the counsel of God. Take heed, therefore to yourselves, and to all the flock, wherein the Holy Spirit has set you as overseers, to shepherd the assembly of God, which he has purchased with the blood of his own. [For] I know [this], that there will come in amongst you after my departure grievous wolves, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves shall rise up men speaking perverted things to draw away the disciples after them” (verses 22 - 30). All this was in view of his leaving; he had not left yet; and now we have this in chapter 20. He was not asked to say all this, but it was according to what the Lord had given him, the ministry of the assembly and the Lord’s supper.
Rem So we get the Supper at Troas, and at Ephesus the service of God.
JT Just [p. 195] so.
Ques What about the seven days at Troas?
JT That is good. It is a whole cycle, so that the whole week was ahead, and the order presented was that the first day was taken for the breaking of bread. In Acts 2:46 they broke bread in the house, but here it is upon the first day of the week.
Rem That was consequent upon Paul’s ministry, being received.
JT Yes.
Rem This is not so much a pattern for us.
JT Well; it was to unfold the truth as to the Lord’s supper.
Rem We would take our understanding of it from 1 Corinthians 11:23, “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you”.
JT I thought so.
Rem We are to be impressed with the need of taking the Supper intelligently.
JT Yes; the brethren would do well to see that Paul’s teaching takes the lead, and this scripture prominently, as Paul is in it all the time, “We being assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed to them”.
Rem So that there was love amongst the brethren.
JT Yes; they embraced Paul, and there is what we call one another.
Rem There is nothing here as to the cup.
JT The breaking of bread covers it all.
FS Do you mean we call one another ‘brethren’?
JT Yes. That is the name by which we are called.
Ques Why do we get “disciples” in the gospels and the Acts, but not in the epistles; is it a practical matter?
JT Well, it shows they were learners; the apostle had in his mind that they should know something, and how we should be disciplined.
HW Would we be disciples in our hearts and minds?
JT [p. 196] The mind is the governing faculty; every human being has a mind, and that governs the position more than the affections. The person has control of it, and thus it has a great place in the Lord’s supper because it is for ‘the calling of me to mind‘ (1 Corinthians 11:24, note i), that is to the mind of the persons who partake of it.
Rem As to the Bereans it is said, “receiving the word with all readiness of mind”, Acts 17: 11.
JT So also we have “pure minds” and “renewed minds”; the mind has a primary place.
Rem Paul says, “I speak as to intelligent persons”, 1 Corinthians 10:15.
JT Yes.
Ques What have we to learn from Eutychus and his life being in him?
JT That incident was to affect them all, and to give Paul a greater place amongst them. He enfolded the boy in his arms; what a real man he was!
Rem He received him into the same place the brethren had, when Paul embraced them in verse 1.
JT Yes; if the Lord intends to bring anyone forward, He can do it.
Rem No one but Paul could do this.
JT No.
Ques How are disciples produced?
JT Well; what or who are we, Christians, disciples or brethren? But whose brethren are we? We should be acquainted with the vocabulary we use.
Rem “The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch”, Acts 11:26.
JT Yes; the word ‘disciples’ has its place.
Ques Would there be special features in ‘disciples’ and ‘Christians’?
JT Yes. Paul’s influence had taken effect, and was no longer Jewish; it was a Christian position.
Ques Are Barnabas and Saul in Acts 11 and 13 models of the Lord’s [p. 197] work?
JT I think much could be said as to Paul and Barnabas at this time. It shows that the local assembly had actually taken its place.
AM Would Isaiah 8:16 show that disciples come in at the end, as to a remnant holding things in a dark day?
JT That is good, and can be carried forward into the book of Acts. Jehovah’s disciples had acquired a place of their own; they are really Messiah’s disciples, and they come into the Acts, and give character to the whole work of God. But Paul was “an elect vessel to me” (Acts 9:15), that is to Christ, not to God; he was Christ’s own peculiar vessel.
Ques What would be involved in the long speaking till daybreak?
JT “And having gone up, and having broken the bread, and eaten, and having long spoken until daybreak, so he went away”. It is somewhat different from “discourse” in verses 7 and 9.
Rem But it is no less authoritative.
JT They were not to break bread till they did know. Love was brought in by the enfolding of Eutychus.
HW Would this discourse and long speaking have in mind the present day?
JT Yes; the discourse would remain.
Rem “Until daybreak” is to impress us.
JT Well; J.N.D. was said to have been on his feet at 10 p.m., still discoursing.
Ques Would the reference to “the disciples” in John 20:19 be on a higher level, perhaps Ephesian?
JT Yes. “When therefore it was evening on that day, which was the first day of the week, and the doors shut where the disciples were, through fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and says to them, Peace be to you”, John 20:19. It was an assembly meeting, and may be compared with Luke 24:36,
[p. 198] which is the same event; it is “their midst”, but in John 20 it is “the midst”.
Rem Luke would be local, but John 20 universal.
JT I am glad you mentioned that; Luke links on with Troas. The Lord says further, “Have ye anything here to eat?” Luke 24:41.
HW Are our readings intended to be instruction for the gospel preachings?
JT Quite so, and that they might proceed according to the general position; notice the article ‘the’ in verse 11.
HW It is “the bread” that He broke in Luke 24: 30.
JT That is what happened at Emmaus; the Lord waited for them and then broke the bread. What a series of events, and then He vanishes, bringing in the spiritual side.
Rem The occasion at Emmaus was not in Jerusalem; it was local.
JT It was much spoken of in the early days, and it gradually became a community, and then they were first called Christians in Antioch. These things all show how the truth is formed, and all has been revived, and we become more and more accustomed to it. Take the fellowship meetings, how we become known to one another, and known as a community.
Rem So that the truth of Corinthians leads to Ephesians.
JT Very good. Corinth comes into Acts. Paul is especially cheered there; the Lord said, “I have much people in this city”, Acts 18:10. They were to be regarded as in the truth, but they got out of order so quickly. He told them to remember the directions, and not to deviate from them.
Ques Would “daybreak” go on to the Lord’s coming?
JT You might speak of it in that way, as to loving His appearing.
[p. 199] Ques What would the position in which Eutychus was found imply to us?
JT “And a certain youth, by name Eutychus, sitting at the window-opening, overpowered by deep sleep, while Paul discoursed very much at length, having been overpowered by the sleep, fell from the third story down to the bottom, and was taken up dead” I suppose the third loft is in keeping with the upper room; it is out of the way of things; it was “where were staying both Peter, and John, and James, and Andrew” (Acts 1:13); it was marked off from the temple, which is Jewish. In Luke 22:12 it says, “And he will shew you a large upper room furnished: there make ready”; and then in verse 39, “And going forth he went according to his custom to the mount of Olives, and the disciples also followed him”. Jesus had a custom to go there in the days of His flesh; it is the link with heaven, as compared with the place where the Supper was taken; so the link with heaven is there.
Rem The “upper chamber” in Acts 1:13 is in keeping with that.
JT Yes; in Elijah’s time, he had a similar place, a loft perhaps, outside of what was current, and he came down and the boy was restored to life; 1 Kings 17:19. As a true servant he was not given the best room.
PH Would the “many lights” be seen in persons?
JT These men were luminous in their bodies.
Rem They were sympathetic persons.
JT Yes; I know it well. One always finds more liberty where the brethren are instructed in the truth. Anyone could enquire from these men; as they said, “to Peter and the other apostles, What shall we do, brethren?” Acts 2: 37.
Rem Eutychus “fell down” but Paul “descended”.
JT Very humbling. The devil fell; the Lord says, “I beheld Satan as lightning falling out of heaven”, Luke 10:18.
Rem Paul’s affections are seen here.
JT Yes, and that “his life is in him”. Caleb says, “Jehovah has kept me alive, as he said, these forty-five years ... . And now behold, I am this day eighty-five years old. I am still this day strong”; Joshua 14:10, a remarkable word. So with love in Paul, and life in the boy, in bringing the two together you get something! The Lord said to Peter, “If I will that he abide until I come, what is that to thee?” John 21:22. They were all very inquisitive, but were not told, and sometimes it is so, and if He is using someone he can have the attitude of mystery if necessary. So they took the boy away, and the conversation was continued; it would not lose its character.
Ques Would the Lord’s word as to Ephesus in Revelation 2:5 be like Eutychus, “Remember, therefore, whence thou art fallen, and repent”?
JT Well; you cannot say too much as to him, but he would never forget it.
HW The references to him as a youth and as a boy would imply personality, like Samuel.
JT Yes; before he is a man.
Rem It would involve his soul-capability, as it says in Philippians 2:2, “joined in soul”.
JT That has its own meaning. Someone has said, ‘The birds have no song, and the men have no souls in America!’ That does not apply to all!
JT The Lord intends us to see that the boy came to something.
Rem As to the young people taking on the ministry, Paul could leave them with these men.
JT Yes, that is so, and so there is this boy, and the question is, Is he alive? And so Elijah prays that the boy’s soul might return (1 Kings 17:21),
[p. 201] showing what God may do for us in answer to our prayers for one or another.
Rem Elisha also prays to Jehovah and the boy is brought to life; (2 Kings 4:33).
JT Yes, just so. With that young man it was a head-matter, “he went out to his father to the reapers. And he said to his father, My head, my head! And he said to the servant, Carry him to his mother”, 2 Kings 4:19. And Elisha went round the house (verse 35); what kind of books, novels and the like were there to cause the death of the boy?
Rem Elisha’s staff was not enough.
JT No. He went over the whole thing, the mouth, the eyes, the hands, both with Elisha and Elijah; how transmitting things are! There are very few men of God; it is seldom mentioned. But can they pass on something like themselves?