“7: And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul...

“7: And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight” (Acts 20).

The Lord’s Supper is the greatest memorial ever given to man. It is a celebration of the death of the sinless Son of God and the declared anticipation of His return.

Brief biblical facts:

1. Instituted by Jesus (Matt. 26: 26-30).2. Observance set forth (I Cor. 11: 23-

26). A. In remembrance (Luke 22: 19). B. With anticipation (I Cor. 11: 26). C. Self-examination (I Cor. 11: 28). D. Worthily (I Cor. 11: 27).3. Place and time (Luke 22: 29, 30;

Acts 20: 7).

Acts 20: 7, an Important Verse

We know of the instituting of the Lord’s Supper, how to partake, and where to partake from various verses, however, Acts 20: 7 provides us with when to partake.

Acts 20: 7 is presently under attack by all extremists, having special interests and an agenda to effect change in the body of Christ.


The Lord’s Supper, the spiritual hub for Lord’s Day worship. Jesus himself instituted the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 26: 26-29). This memorial of Jesus’ death and announcement of his second coming is a Kingdom act, performed by Kingdom citizens and done in the Kingdom (Luke 22: 15-20). The fact that the early church observed this memorial of Jesus’ death declared not only its place in public worship, but also the reality of the establishment of the Kingdom (cp. I Cor. 11: 23f.).


The expression, “breaking of bread” (Greek, klasei tou artou) in Acts 2: 42 was something in which they regularly engaged and constituted part of their worship. The expression as spiritually applied, appears to have derived from, “…Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it….” (Matt. 26: 26).


The unleavened bread and fruit of the vine present during the typical feast associated with Jewish worship (the “Passover”) constituted the milieu for Jesus introducing his feast, the unleavened bread and fruit of the vine taking on a new, sublimated meaning that would “symbolize” his own sacrificial body and blood.


The expression, "…first day of the week" in Acts 20: 7 is from the Greek, mia ton sabbaton. Literally translated, mia ton sabbaton is rendered, "one or first (mia) of the (ton) Sabbaths” (sabbaton). As you can see, mia ton sabbaton is idiomatic and thus rendered, appears awkward in English. Relevant verses to aid in an understanding of mia ton sabbaton or "…first day of the week" are Matthew 28: 1; Mark 16: 2; Luke 24: 1; and John 20: 1.


Matthew tells us that Mary Magdalene and the "other Mary" came to Jesus’ sepulcher, "In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week…." Mark mentioned it was early on the first day; Luke said on the first day, very early in the morning; and John described the time as early, still dark, on the first day of the week.


Regarding Matthew’s time statement, commentator Albert Barnes thus comments:

"The word ‘end’ here means the same as ‘after’ the Sabbath – that is, after the Sabbath was fully completed or finished, and may be expressed in this manner: ‘In the night following the Sabbath, for the Sabbath closed at sunset, as it began to dawn’" (Barnes on the New Testament, Vol. 1, pg. 317).


Albert Barnes observes the following regarding, "Upon the first day of the week" in I Corinthians 16: 2:"Upon the first day of the week. Greek, "On one of the Sabbaths." The Jews, however, used the word Sabbath to denote the week; the period of seven days, Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:9; Luke 18:12; 24:1 John 20:1,19. Comp. Leviticus 23:15; Deuteronomy 16:9. It is universally agreed that this here denotes the first day of the week, or the Lord's-day" (Barnes on the New Testament, Vol. 5).


The syntactically linked wording, “…when the disciples came together to break bread” (Greek, …sunegmenon klasai) is not only indicative of purpose but also of practice, especially when all pertinent matters are considered. As seen, the breaking of bread was a regular and static act of Lord’s Day public worship performed by the Jerusalem church (Acts 2: 42).


Many of the early historians remark that the frequency of the Lord’s table was each Lord’s Day. Tertullian (204 A.D.) wrote: "The church of Christ composed of baptized believers, does…meet each Lord’s day to…partake of the Lord’s Supper…."


John Mason, noted Presbyterian scholar, wrote: "Communion every Lord’s day was universal, and was preserved in the Greek church till the Seventh Century" (Church History for Busy People, pg. 86, I might add, I Cor. 11: 26, "for as often…", does not negate or preclude the verses which show how often). The acclaimed Pulpit Commentary states regarding, “…to break bread” in Acts 20: 7, “This is also an important example of weekly communion as the practice of the first Christians” (Vol. 18, p. 143).


“Since there is this attitude of sacredness in relation to ‘staff of life,’ there grows out of it the universal Eastern custom of ‘breaking’ bread and not cutting it….To cut bread would be thought of as cutting life itself. This custom of breaking bread rather than cutting it, is found throughout the scriptures. In Lamentations 4: 4 we read: ‘The young children ask bread, and no man breaketh it unto them.’ Thus the expression ‘breaking of bread’ came to mean the taking of a meal whatever was included in the meal. Because Christ broke bread when he instituted the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper, the expression came to refer to that ordinance. Matthew 26: 26: ‘Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave to his disciples.’ Thus we read in Acts 20: 7: ‘And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached to them.” (Manners and Customs of Bible Lands, p. 45, by Fred Wight).


In all fairness, how do we distinguish between the “breaking of bread” as a social act and the “breaking of bread” as an act of public worship (Lord’s Supper)? This question is especially pertinent in view of the social gospel and its glorification of social meals.


A growing controversy now dividing some churches of Christ is whether or not Acts 20: 7 is to be viewed as general in terms of meeting(s) or exclusive, authorizing only one meeting on the Lord’s Day. Some would insist on wording this, “Authorizing one meeting in which the Lord’s Supper is observed.”


I do not believe one has a total understanding of the institution Jesus introduced at the last supper without understanding the Passover observance. There are many, I submit, similarities. Both the Jewish Passover and the Lord's Supper are God's appointments for the Jew, in the case of the Passover, and the Christian, in the case of the Lord's Supper (Ex. 12: 14; Matt. 26: 29).


Both the Passover and Jesus' spiritual feast are memorials (Ex. 12: 14; I Cor. 11: 25). The Jew remembered his liberation from bondage and the Christian remembers Jesus, his spiritual liberation.The unleavened bread and fruit of the vine were present and served as the key elements for both the Passover and the Lord's table (Ex. 12: 8; Matt. 26: 26, 27).These two institutions were designed for God's peculiar people, the Jews and Christians, respectively (Deut. 16: 5; Lk. 22: 29, 30).Both feasts stressed the absence of sin and impurity (Num. 9: 6; I Cor. 5: 7).


Both the Passover and the Lord's Supper depended on the shedding of blood, animal blood and Jesus' own blood, respectively (Ex. 12: 7; Matt. 26: 28).The Passover and Jesus' observance both have a specified time for their observance (Ex. 12: 3; Acts 20: 7). The Jew would not have even thought about randomly observing the Passover and the early Christians partook of the Lord's memorial on a designated day (Acts 20: 7). Both the Passover and the Lord's Memorial involve a nation, the Jewish and Christians. Upon closer examination, they both generally involve distributive action (Ex. 12: 3, 4; I Cor. 10: 16, 17, 11: 18ff.).


Regarding the Passover and Jesus’ spiritual feast, there is, generally speaking, what we call "same time action" (Ex. 12: 3, 4-7; Lk. 22: 17). However, this "same time action" is not truly simultaneity action. Regarding the Passover, there was specific provision to allow those who were unable to attend the Passover at the regular time to attend one month later. Consider the provision:


"9: And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 10: Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If any man of you or of your posterity shall be unclean by reason of a dead body, or be in a journey afar off, yet he shall keep the passover unto the LORD. 11: The fourteenth day of the second month at even they shall keep it, and eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs" (Num. 9).


Consider Paul's statement to the Christians at Corinth regarding how they (he and they) partook of the Lord's blood and body (I Cor. 10: 16, 17)? They partook together even though there was a distance of about 275 miles and the Aegean Sea physically separating them.

Many of the problems and division surrounding the Lord's Memorial are introduced and experienced when we journey to areas in addition to the known static truths.


When man starts to focus and bind regarding the number of containers, whether or not those serving the bread break it before it is passed out; or insisting on "simultaneity action" in addition to distributive, individual action in the assembly, the wrong emphasis surfaces. Our attention is not to be on such exacting matters, I am convinced, but on Him who loved us and died for us. It is in the assembly setting that each Christian remembers Jesus' suffering and anticipates the Second Advent. Wrangling over matters of the policing of the Supper and Jewish as oppose to Roman time distract from the deep spiritual meaning of the Memorial.


Regarding the day, elements, place, and individual manner of observance, we must not yield to any other practice. However, regarding providing the means for those unable to attend the morning service, we need to exercise love, consideration, and patience.


The Greek word often used in Acts by the historian Luke to describe Paul's preaching, even in Acts 20: 7, is the word dialegomai (often translated "reasoned" and "disputed" in the KJV). The root meaning of dialegomai is twofold in action, to think or reason, considering different and conflicting ideas). W. E. Vines comments thus on dialegomai, "To think different things with oneself, to ponder, then, to dispute with others.…" (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words).


Dialegomai is weakened when translated "lectured." Thayer observes regarding the use of dialegomai in Acts, "…mingle thought with thought…argue, discuss…to draw arguments from the scriptures with the idea of disputing…" (Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, pg. 139).



Let us ever derive from Acts 20: 7 what is intended, but also be careful not to forcefully extract from it what was never intended.

“7: And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul...

Documents

Transcript of “7: And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul...