AD 70, The Lord's Supper and Preterism, A Cake Unturned?

Several Amillennialists and other futurists believe that if Jesus' second coming occurred in AD 70, then why do Preterists take the Lord's Supper. Some even argue that the practice of taking the communion disproves the teaching that all Bible prophecy is fulfilled, including the Second Coming of Christ.

Most arguments center on 1 Corinthians 11:26. "For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till He comes." Some have asked "How can those who teach full Preterism, in good conscience take the Lord's Supper this side of 70 AD?

This question assumes that Paul wrote 1 Corinthians to today's church versus to the first century church. When we read the epistles (letters) of the New Testament, we should be aware that we are reading "other" people's mail.

For example, when he states in chapter one, that those saints had come behind in no gift, i.e. miraculous gift, eagerly waiting for the coming of the Lord, he said "they" would be confirmed to the end. The discussions of chapters 12-14, regarding spiritual gifts, were immediately applicable to them, not us. The era of the miraculous charismata passed at 70 AD.

Secondly, when he wrote in chapter 10:11, that the "end of the ages have come upon us," he spoke not of 21st century Chritians but of those in the first century. Compare also in 1 Cor. 7:26, where he says the "world is passing away." They, not us, truly lived in the end of the Old Covenant cosmos.

Likewise in speaking of the taking of the Lord's Supper in chapter eleven, he wrote about contemporary issues within the first century church. It is they with their divisions, factions and the unwillingness on the part of some to wait for others in taking the Supper which he targeted with rebuke, (1 Cor. 11:17-22). For this reason, he offers the teaching regarding the Supper, saying "they" not "we" (as in those of us today), would "proclaim the Lord's death till he came.

To proclaim the Lord's death has a much greater significance than eating unleavened bread and drinking the fruit of the vine. It is the proclaiming of the true purpose and applied meaning of Jesus' death in the flesh. Christ was yet reconciling Jew and Gentile through the body of his flesh "through death," (Col. 1:22). Failing to demonstrate unity in partaking of the Lord's Supper ran counter to that purpose. The full meaning and expression of Jesus' death in the flesh would not be completed until his return.

On the other hand, the Spirit simultaneously began confirming the "life of Christ" in the Spirit during the interim of his absence. (The Spirit was the guardian of the church, preventing their orphanage until Christ returned.) This was the goal of eschatology and the Lord's Supper. It is precisely why Christ taught that the Father had appointed to him a kingdom and that the saints would eat and drink "new" with him at his table in his Father's kingdom.

Thus, Christ saw the future arrival of the kingdom (Luke 21:31), as the time when the reproach of Christ's death in the flesh would be completed in consummation of the mystery (Eph. 3:3-9; Rev. 10:7) while at the same time establishing his life in the Spirit. The church would then be transformed from a "body of humiliation" to share in the body of Christ's glory. (Phil. 3:21)

Those who cite 1 Cor. 11: 26, as their sole "proof-text" for the Lord's Supper debate, are only baking one side of their corn bread. Let's get both key texts before us to fully understand "all" pertinent information on the subject.

Some argued that since the Lord's supper is a celebration of the New Covenant, why was it not celebrated in the New Covenant era? The point is that if the New Covenant was the future age to come, then to partake of the Lord's Supper before then meant they were not celebrating it in that age. The point is, they were not celebrating it new with Christ in the consummated kingdom of God.

Matt. 26:27-28 is also cited by futurists to prove the Lord spoke of "remembering" the New Covenant. But this fails to grasp the point of emphasis of the context and how it applies to the New Covenant.

Jesus said the bread was his body, (to be soon offered up as sacrifice), and that the cup was his blood to be soon shed for the New Testament. However, it was the "body of his flesh" that died on the cross. Again, that was the same "body of flesh" in which he was reconciling Jew and Gentile or the world to himself.

Jesus' blood was shed to mediate transgressions which were under the first testament that they might receive the promise of eternal inheritance, (Heb. 9:15). That means Christ's blood focused on sins of the past in order to provide a blessing of the future for Old Covenant saints. But, they could not achieve it apart from New Covenant saints, (Heb. 11:39, 40), which is another way of saying they would all receive it at the future time of the inheritance of the kingdom, (Matt. 25:31; Heb. 12:29).

Therefore, although Christ had risen from the dead, the complete and full outworking of his death in the flesh continued beyond the cross event. The "mystery of God" is not completed until Christ's return, (Rev. 10:7), and all Bible prophecy is fulfilled.

Moreover, Rom. 7:4, states some died to the law through the "body of Christ" that they should be "married to another" even to him who was raised from the dead." When Paul wrote, (60 AD), the marriage was yet future because the process of "dying to the law" was incomplete, (Eph 5:26f; Rev. 19:7,8, 21:1-2, 9).

Not until the marriage occurred would Jesus' dying in the flesh" have its full redemptive expression. This is why Paul wrote in Colossians that they, some 30 years after Pentecost were yet being reconciled in the "body of his flesh." Thus, the Corinthians were to remember Christ's death.

The Future Goal of the Lord's Supper

The Lord's Supper had a dual purpose, just as did Christ's body in the flesh, versus his resurrection in the Spirit, --transforming from death to life.(See Rom. 1:3, 4). The dual purpose of the Communion corresponded to that state of transformation.

So, the Lord Supper had a future goal that focused on the life motif of the Lord's resurrection in the Spirit. For this, we must consult Luke chapter 22, to get the other side of the picture and thereby, bake both sides of the bread.

Until It is Fulfilled In the Kingdom of God

Jesus spoke the same words about the Lord's Supper as he did of the Passover. Luke 22:16, "For I say to you, I will no longer eat of it until it [the Passover] is fulfilled in the kingdom of God." Then he divides the Passover meal among them. It is at that point that he introduces the Lord Supper, (19-20).

However, according to Mark 14:25, he points to the eschatological goal, saying, "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." Thus he repeats that he would not drink again with them until it was "fulfilled" in that day in the kingdom.

The gospels, the epistles and Revelation show the future coming of the kingdom, (Mat. 25:31, Lk. 21:31; 2 Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15). Those texts cannot be compressed into a Pentecost Acts 2, time frame. We posit, this is the time the Lord spoke about concerning the fulfillment of the Passover and Lord's Supper in the kingdom of God.

Historical Meaning of the Passover

The death of the paschal lamb looked back in remembrance of the deliverance from Pharaoh's army in Egypt. However, Israel never considered themselves delivered while they were in the wilderness. Deliverance is not merely "from" bondage, but it is "to" freedom.

In this sense, American slavery of Blacks did not end with the Emancipation Proclamation. Slaves were delivered from "chains" but were left in the wilderness of economic bondage without their promised "40 acres and a mule." They were delivered from, but not to, and thus, their economic bondage continues to this day and will not end until reparations are paid, as in the case of ancient Israel. Thus, the Passover also looked forward to freedom and possession of the Land of Canaan, not abandonment to a desert wilderness.

For this reason, they anticipated the eating of the Passover once their wilderness sojourn was over, when they would be a nation, with their own land. In Joshua 5:10, when they entered the land, they ate the Passover, this time, not looking back at Egypt or in during the interim with hope of the promised Canaan, but in celebration of having received it as a goal or end reached. In this manner, the Passover is fulfilled in the historic case.

Likewise, when the kingdom arrived at Christ's return, they would eat the Passover and Lord's Supper "anew" in the kingdom when their deliverance from the bondage of sin was complete.

Irresponsible Arguments on AD 70, the Lord's Supper and Preterism

Attempts to explain away the time statements proving Jesus' imminent first century return appears in the writings of some in texts such as Heb. 8:13. Forced interpretations say that the Old Covenant had already been made obsolete. To the contrary, it reads, "'what is becoming obsolete and is growing old,' is ready to vanish." Thus, the Old Covenant did not and could not pass until AD 70. That means N.T. writers were not under the impression they were already living beyond the Old Covenant age. Thus, they were anticipating the age to come/kingdom, (Heb 6:5).

Finally, regarding taking the Lord's Supper and Preterism, note that even if Preterists are inconsistent in the practice, (and for reasons above, we have demonstrated they are not), it would no more negate the imminent return of Christ in AD 70, than the inconsistent practice of the Corinthians negated the instructions giving by Paul.

They could not take the Lord Supper because of divisions, yet, the teaching remained valid. So the practice is a moot issue as far as the "argument" is concerned. Thus we could ask, since there are divisions and factions in futurists churches, why do they partake of the Lord's Supper?

Seed Newsvine

Bookmark this article in your preferred program

Comments

Sun, 30 Aug 2009 at 11:24 AM, by Cretien
Grace be with you, from the Lord Jesus Christ.

According to scriptures, Christ shall return in 2018. I pray you will visit this site for more insights unto the things to come: http://www.theelects.org

Grace be with you.

Add Comment

Popular Articles in this cathegory

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.