LeavenVolume 3Issue 3 The Lord's Supper Article 6

1-1-1995

The Lord's Supper and the Lord's DayPhilip Slate

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leavenPart of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought,

Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Religion at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Leaven byan authorized administrator of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact Kevin.Miller3@pepperdine.edu.

Recommended CitationSlate, Philip (1995) "The Lord's Supper and the Lord's Day," Leaven: Vol. 3: Iss. 3, Article 6.Available at: http://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol3/iss3/6

The Lord's Supper 17

heLord's Supper

and theLord's Day

by Philip Slate

Two modern concerns raise afresh the ques-tion about the appropriate day of corporate worshipfor Christians. First, as the gospel spreads world-wide should Christians assemble on a locally estab-lished religious day, or is there a distinctive day forChristians to worship corporately? For example,should Christians in Nazareth, Israel, assemble onSaturday (in a Jewish State) or Friday (in deferenceto the large Arab, hence Muslim, population inNazareth) or Sunday (for some biblical reason)? Thisis a live missiological question.

Second, as secularism gradually dominatesformerly Christian territory and people are requiredto work on Sunday as often as Thursday (as in partsofWestern Europe), is there a principle involved ininsisting on Sunday as a day ofworship? Will one dayin seven suffice? If so, should the day ofworship alsobe a day of rest?

This second reason goaded W. Rordorfto dohis work, Sunday.' Since then many articles andbooks have appeared on various aspects of the sub-ject. They all have equal access to the data, but theyarrive at different positions: continued seventh-daySabbath," one day in seven for rest, Sunday as aSabbath, etc." These varying positions arise chieflyfrom the prior hermeneutical conclusions the au-thors have reached about the relationship betweenthe Old and New Testaments, Jesus' attitude towardthe Sabbath, the normative character ofearly churchpractice, and the validity of the post-apostolic mate-rials.

Narrowing the ScopeFor functional purposes, it is assumed here

that neither Saturday nor Sunday, the seventh northe first day ofthe week is to be kept by Christians asa Sabbath (no-work; rest) day. The recent studies byboth Rordorf and Carson seem compelling on thesepoints." But if the first day is the day on which allChristians should assemble, what is its significance?

The resurrection of Jesus occurred on thefirst day of the week. All four Gospels testify thatJesus was raised from the dead on that day. It was"when the Sabbath was past ... very early on the firstday ofthe week they went to the tomb ... "(Mark 16:1-2; see Luke 24:1,13, 33-35; John 20:1; and Matt 28:1).At the center ofthe early Christian proclamation wasthe affirmation that Jesus was raised "on the thirdday," which was the first day of the week (1 Cor 15:3-5). Jesus was "designated Son ofGod in power ... byhis resurrection from the dead" (Rom 1:3), an actthrough which also Christians were/are ''born anewto a living hope" (1 Pet 1:3). This act of centralsignificance to the Christian took place on the firstday of the week.

Jesus chose to make many ofhis post-resur-rection appearances on the first day of the week. Onthe evening ofthat resurrection day, "the first day ofthe week," Jesus "came and stood among them" (John20:19). When he manifested himself to Thomas itwas "eight days later" (v 26); and at least one mealwith the disciples was on "that day" (Luke 24:28-43with verses 1 and 13), the day on which he appearedto the two on the Emmaus road.

1

Slate: The Lord's Supper and the Lord's Day

Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1995

18 Leaven, vol. 3, #3

The decisive coming of the Holy Spirit onPentecost, and the consequent beginning of the mes-sianic people of God, the church, took place on thefirst day of the week (cf. Lev 23:15-16). It is difficultto see all of these as mere coincidences, especiallyagainst the background ofa paucity ofsuch emphasisin the Old Testament. Why were not other days usedas incidental markers of time?

How did the early church understand this?As with other questions we may ask of Scripture, wewould like more information than we have here. Butthere are three New Testament texts of importance.In Troas Paul and his companions, on their way backto Jerusalem, stayed for seven days (Acts 20:6). Itwould appear that an incidental evening meetingcould have been arranged at any point, but the textstates that on the "first day of the week" they "gath-ered together to break bread" (v 7), even though noparticular meaning is attached to that day itself.This text alone furnishes limited information, but, itforms part of the cumulative evidence one mustconsider.

Paul directed the churches of Corinth andGalatia to "put something aside and store it up" "onthe first day of every week" (1 Cor 16:1-2). If thatcollection is interpreted as a mere home duty at theend of a work week, then it would appear Paul wouldhave failed to achieve what he had in mind, viz., avoida collection when he came through (v 2). Nor is itevident that either Saturday or Sunday were pay-days as we think of them. Why not just specify "everyweek" or "regularly" if nothing in particular wasoccurring on the first day? When one considers theoptions it is difficult to escape the conclusion thatsomething was going on "every first day of the week,"although here no meaning is given to that day,especially since it was not Paul's didactic purpose todo so.

The significance of the third text likely hasbeen overlooked, even by the Protestant Reformers.John declared he "was in the Spirit on the Lord's day"(Rev 1:10) and saw the strikingly dressed personagestanding among the lampstands who claimed to be"the first and the last, and the living one" who diedand is now "alive for evermore" with the keys ofDeath and Hades (vss 17-18). Although the Lordmade every day, why would a particular day bedesignated as the "Lord's day?" John gives no expla-nation of the day in the text; he merely refers to it asthough his readers would know what he meant. Ifweare permitted to determine the meaning of "Lord'sday" as we determine the meanings of other NewTestament words which are used infrequently, thenthe meaning is dear. As Deissmann's work illumi-nates various New Testament word meanings, so the

post-apostolic materials are decisive about the mean-ing of "Lord's day."

Several collections of early second centurymaterials are available," and no one can seriouslyquestion that the earliest post-apostolic Christiansused the expression "Lord's day" to mean the first dayof the week." Thus in Revelation, he who is Lordamong competing lords (Rev 17:14; 19:16, etc.), theone who conquers for the faithful (Rev 17:14), has aday exclusively related to him, and that is the firstday of the week. The earliest associations betweenJesus and the first day were in connection with hisresurrection and post-resurrection appearances; andit seems more than coincidental that he should referto himself in this context as the living one, who diedand is alive for evermore (Rev 1:18).

Separately, these three texts seem indeci-sive; collectively, and especially with the secondcentury witness to the meaning of the "Lord's day,"they make it clear that special significance wasattached to the first day because it was the day oftheresurrection of Jesus, a pivotal event for Christianfaith (1 Cor 15:12-19). As such, it was the day ofregular assembly for the whole church, regardless ofhow many smaller or incidental (cf Acts 12:5, 12;20:17,36-38) meetings they may have enjoyed. Someregular assembly time was stipulated (cf, Heb 10:25),and the only cumulative evidence we have for aspecific day is that it was the first day of the week, theresurrection day. As Ferguson states, "It so happensthat on the question ofthe day ofChristian assemblythe witnesses from the early church are numerous,unanimous, and unambiguous."? Nor is there any-thing strange in assigning a new day for worship tomark the unique, salvation-history events of Jesus'death and resurrection, events that inaugurated themessianic era, just as food elements from the Pass-over were given new significance in the Lord's Sup-per.

The Lord's SupperThe New Testament is clear that the "Lord's

supper" (1 Cor 11:20) is a corporate activity; it is nota sacrament administered individually regardless ofcontext. In 1 Corinthians chapters 10 and 11 it isobvious that the supper had a communal function.When many partake of the "one bread" they are toaffirm their participation in one body (10:17). Theactivity was to take place "when you come together"(11:17) or "assemble as a church" (11:20).

At every point ofmeaning for the supper thefocus is on Jesus in his redemptive capacity: givingthanks (v 24), remembrance (vv 24-25), covenantblood (v 25), and proclamation of his death until hecomes (v 26). Again, the witness of the early second

2

Leaven, Vol. 3 [1995], Iss. 3, Art. 6

http://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol3/iss3/6

century is that such activities were regularly carriedout on the Lord's day. The meanings attached to theLord's day are virtually identical with the meaningsfound in the Lord's Supper. They belong together.

Oddly enough, in the Carson studies theLord's Supper in connection with the Lord's day isscarcely mentioned, and that may arise from themore limited nature of their inquiry. On the otherhand, Rordorf sees a strong connection between theLord's day and the Lord's Supper. One statement inhis conclusion is: "NoLord's supper without Sunday,and no Sunday without the Lord's supper." Hemakes out a fairly compelling case for his view, andit is consistent with the above biblical and post-apostolic understanding. Having the Lord's Supperon another day weakens its doctrinal significance asa corporate act connected with first-day events.

In one sense, everything a "holy" people,priesthood and nation (1 Pet 1:15-16;2:5-9) possessand relate to are sanctified for God's purposes, in-cluding things, space and time. The Old Testamentseventh day was no more inherently holy than thethird day. God gave all days. But the seventh daywas so to mark an event that, ideally, a pious Jew

The Lord's Supper 19

would be more covenantally faithful on every otherday. Sowith the Lord's day. One who regularly andappropriately marks the resurrection day shouldhave a more vigorous and consistent resurrectionfaith (1 Pet 1:3)on every other day. The Lord's day-Lord's Supper connection are designed to have sucha focusthat all oflife will be pivoted on the salvation-history events. If this analysis is correct, then itsuggests that more needs to be said in sermons andat "the table of the Lord" about the relationshipbetween Lord's day events, Lord's table, and the Lordof life.

In pagan and other non-Christian communi-ties it would seem important to retain first-daymeetings and Lord's Supper, even if that is doneearly in the morning or later in the evening. It is theregular reminder ofthe redemptive acts ofJesus andthe eschatological dimension ofthe Christian's hope.One is neither Judaistic nor legalistic in such empha-ses.

Philip Slate is Chairperson of the MissionsDepartment, Abilene Christian University, AbileneTexas.

3

Slate: The Lord's Supper and the Lord's Day

Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1995