Daily text, Thursday, September 8. 2016

[Queen Esther]

Keep doing this in remembrance of me.—1 Cor. 11:24.

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/dt/r1/lp-e/2016/9/8

Night has fallen, but a full moon bathes Jerusalem in soft light. It is the evening of Nisan 14, 33 C.E. Jesus and his apostles have celebrated the Passover, commemorating Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian bondage 15 centuries earlier. With 11 loyal apostles, Jesus now institutes a special meal—one that will memorialize the death he will experience before this day ends. (Matt. 26:1, 2) Jesus says a blessing and passes unleavened bread to the apostles, saying: “Take, eat.” He takes a cup of wine, again offers thanks, and says: “Drink out of it, all of you.” (Matt. 26:26, 27) Jesus will not pass other food items to them, but he will have much more to tell his faithful followers on this momentous night. So it was that Jesus instituted the Memorial of his death, also called “the Lord’s Evening Meal.”—1 Cor. 11:20. w15 1/15 2:1-3

[Menrov]

It is always good to read the context. Paul is talking to the entire congregation. they gathered and ate. But they did not eat with respect. They ate because they were hungry and some got drunk.

Objective of the meal: 1 Cor. 11:26 For every time you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

So, does this mean that all WHO DO NOT eat nor drink are NOT proclaiming the Lord's death? If one is in the congregation but does not eat or drink, according to Paul, is not supporting the arrangement. You can ask yourself: why be present?

It is not being an observer but objective was to participate.

Verse 33 explains: 33 So then, my brothers and sisters,¹² when you come together to eat, wait for one another. 34 If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that when you assemble it does not lead to judgment. I will give directions about other matters when I come.

Unfortunately, the WBTS teaches not to gather to eat but actually to deny the bread and wine and only be there to observe. I cannot find a verse or verses that supports this.

Anyone?

 

 

 

[HollyW]

35 minutes ago, Menrov said:

It is always good to read the context. Paul is talking to the entire congregation. they gathered and ate. But they did not eat with respect. They ate because they were hungry and some got drunk.

Objective of the meal: 1 Cor. 11:26 For every time you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

So, does this mean that all WHO DO NOT eat nor drink are NOT proclaiming the Lord's death? If one is in the congregation but does not eat or drink, according to Paul, is not supporting the arrangement. You can ask yourself: why be present?

It is not being an observer but objective was to participate.

Verse 33 explains: 33 So then, my brothers and sisters,¹² when you come together to eat, wait for one another. 34 If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that when you assemble it does not lead to judgment. I will give directions about other matters when I come.

Unfortunately, the WBTS teaches not to gather to eat but actually to deny the bread and wine and only be there to observe. I cannot find a verse or verses that supports this.

Anyone?

 

Good points, Menrov.

Since the Apostle Paul was addressing this to Christians who all had the heavenly hope, I think the ones who would not be partaking in the first century would be those among the anointed who had unconfessed sin or were in some way unworthy to participate in the Lord's communion.

1 Corinthians 11:27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. ²⁸ But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. ²⁹ For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.

The WTS interprets this examining of oneself today to mean whether one has the heavenly hope or the earthly hope; but the Apostle Paul wrote this to only those who had the heavenly hope so he couldn't have meant that sort of an examination and probably not that sort of distinction among Christians.

There is a similar instance in Numbers 9:10 when certain Israelites were unclean or on a journey and could not take part in the Passover celebration in the first month so they were allowed to have their Passover a month later.  This could be similar to the Christians in the first century who were in some way unworthy to partake and so they refrained from the communion.