Sabbath and Communion

Catholics have long held that in communion the body and blood of Christ are reformed in the communion bread and cup. A doctrine called transubstantiation. Of course non-catholics disagree stating it is a remembrance of Christ's body and blood at the time of his crucifixion and death, not a present tense death and offering of Christ, but a remembrance of what was done at the cross. Catholics will admit it is a remembrance but demand it to be much greater than just a remembrance. They tend to make everything as grandois as possible, making their service more holy than the next church. Its not necessarily holiness if done in pride and arrogance to over shadow other people. In that case it would be sinful. It would also violate Christ's command not to do your alms before men to be seen of men. Remember Christ condemned broadened phylacteries that made old testament priests appear holy. Same concept here, doing more and greater to appear holy. In their service you hear bells, see priestly garment ordained, stained glass to appear lighted by God's throne, and expensive woods and vessels. Holiness doesn't mean bells and whistles but obedience.

The Sabbath tends to disprove Catholic theology because the Ten Commands had a remembrance clause just as the Lord's Supper did. This sabboth remembered the manna God gave from heaven, they rested from gathering since God had finished giving for the week. Exodus 16 covers this principle. Some went out to gather on the 7th day and found none. Anyway the two covenants had two days of remembrance and these have some likenesses and similarities.

Remember the Sabbath day

This do in remembrance

Each type of sabbath is a different cessation and rest. Both in this case are a remembrance, one is the rest given when Israel was set free from Egypt see Deut 5 and a rest from collecting manna. The sabbath day remembrance wasn't a literal transportation back into Egypt to relive the deaths of the firstborn and the Exodus as Pharoah said Go you are free, it includes the blessing of manna, it is the completion of deliverance and rest from collection.

The Exodus 16 sabbath has a spiritual principle of collection, they were to collect the manna as we seek the word during the week. The Heb 10:25 passage has this principle, "and so much more as you see the day approaching", on the day before the sabbath they collected a double amount, thus increasing as they prepared. We should seek the word of Christ daily but increase as we approach the Lord's day.

 The sabboth of the creation 7th day is a remembrance of God resting from creation, the Sabboth of the Exodus remembers freedom from Pharoah, remembering them isn't a present day redooing, the effects are ongoing so that the effects don't depend upon a modern priest making those Sabboths legally active, the sabbath stays active from that day forward and we only have to remember. God's rest from creation is ongoing, Israel's rest from Pharoah is ongoing, and the rest given in Christ is ongoing. There is no need to re-sacrifice every Sunday. That is blaspheme against God, to think what God finished man must sustain.

Catholics have used John 6 to say Christ's body is bread that comes down from heaven every communion, when John 6 doesn't say that, and that violates the Sabbath reality. In the Law they received a double portion on Friday so they would not collect on Saturday. Thus, living bread doesn't come down from heaven on Sundays. It would come in 6 days and the 7th it would be remembered.

In the law no bread from heaven fell on the sabbath, only 6 days did it fall. So, to require Christ's body to fall from heaven on Sunday misrepresents the whole concept, we receive a daily portion remembered at the end of the week. There is no provision in the New Testament for Christ's body and blood to fall from heaven on Sunday, Christians receive it daily in faith, Christ is given daily as the manna was, given over 6 days not on the Sabbath day, this kept the Sabbath Holy as a convocation and remembrance. Christ died Friday and not Saturday on the sabbath. The resurrection was Sunday. Also, the manna had an end, it stopped just as Christ's sacrifice was completed. Christ isn't being reincarnated every Sunday, he was made incarnate once. John 6, he was crucified once John 19, and was resurrected once John 20, but taught about daily and remembered weekly. John 6 is about the incarnation as much as anything else. He died once and was resurrected once. Does God need us to resurrect him every week or is God's work in that area completed with lasting effects? The sacrafice was completed with lasting effects, our job is to remember it.

The 10 commands didn't create the sabbath but formed how to remember what already was in Exodus 16, God rested from creation, Israel rested and was long gone from Egypt, Christ finished his work and that work was finished, New Testament commands simply form a pattern in remembering Christ's crucifixion, his work and our rest.

Keep in mind Jesus corrected the idea of Moses giving the manna, so no earthly priest had to be involved in the daily distribution of it. Christ was not given by any human priest. John 3:16 says God gave Christ. Followd up in John 6 where it is said again God gave Christ. No priest prayed for or invoked or initiated what God gave. Thus the work of human priests is misrepresented by Catholics. Manna represents a daily distribution about Christ into the world, the gathering of that manna is by individuals throughout the week. John 6 typifies manna in this way. The chapter typifies gathering and not remembering. Catholics have always had it backwards.

John 6:32

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. 

All of John is meant to produce belief that Jesus was the incarnate Son of God, so In the context of John 6 no human priest can give Christ, only the Father. So it isn't speaking of communion where a catholic priest invokes Christ to come down from heaven. If you follow the flow it isn't speaking of the Lord's Supper, but the incarnation and the Cross and our partaking through knowledge. Partaking of Christ is daily, it is compared to manna which was daily. It is not speaking of a yearly, quarterly, or weekly communion. It is a daily meal that is eaten every day by someone. Catholics only require communion Easter and Christmas, twice a year to stay in good standing, but Jesus is talking about ongoing sustenance not a two-time act. In the verse below the "came down" is past tense (2nd aorist meaning already completed) while the "eateth" is present tense. The coming down has already happened at the time Jesus spoke it, so it isn't speaking of a later communion. Eateth is present so speaking of something before a later communion. It is speaking of the incarnation into flesh and blood.

John 6:58

This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. 

When you view John 6 as a continueing argument from John 5 and flowing into chapter 7, it is clearly about the incarnation of the Son of God. See,

John 5:18

Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. 

Chapter 5 flows into chapter 6 and then the belief clauses from chapter 5 and 6 are spoken of Christ's brothers. Their call was to shew himself openly so they could believe he was the son doing God's work.

John 7:4

For [there is] no man [that] doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, shew thyself to the world.