Johnson 1

Eucharist and Covenant:

Discerning the Lords Supper within Old Testament Sacraments

Introduction

In the Reformed tradition, discussion of the Lords Supper has found a moderate place

within theological treatises and systematic theologies, primarily addressing its role as a sign and

seal of the Covenant of Grace and a physical reiteration of the preaching of the Word.1 In the

first few centuries following the Reformation, the Lords Supper was a major topic of debate,

concerned primarily with refutations of transubstantiation and the withholding of the elements

from the people of God. 2 Among Reformers, the debates raged between Luthers, Calvins, and

Zwinglis view of the Lords presence in the Supper. Even among the 17th century Puritan

church, the debates raged between three distinct views of its purpose and power in the hearts and

souls of the participants.3 Today many of these debates are still being had, although generally far

removed from the average parishioner. As a result, in many Protestant churches, the Lords

Supper has been overshadowed by the preaching of the Word to such a degree that many contend

with Donald MacLeod that it contributes nothing to the parishioner that is not already imparted

by the preaching of the Word.4 This is in clear contrast to the high importance given it by many

1
Within all Reformed dogmatics and systematic theologies, ample space is generally given to the Lords Supper,
although usually not as much as its sacramental counterpart.

2
It would be pointless to attempt to cite a compendium of works given to the transubstantiation debate, but it is
telling that in many of the Reformers writings on the Lords Supper, the majority of space is dedicated to this
debate, and secondarily to other matters. Calvins Treatises on the Sacraments is a fine example of this emphasis.

3
E. Brooks Holifield, The Covenant Sealed: The Development of Puritan Sacramental Theology in Old and New
England, 1570-1720 (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2002), 109.

4
Donald MacLeod, The Lords Supper as a Means of Grace (N.P, N.D.), 17. While the preaching of the Word has
always been the focal point of the worship service in the Protestant tradition, the Lords Supper has been ignored to
a far greater degree than Calvin or the Puritans would have ever have supported.
 Johnson 2

of the Patristics, 5 and quite opposed to the Orthodox Churchs regard of the Eucharist as the

central feature of church worship. While this over-emphasis in Patristic and Orthodox theology

fails to find proper grounding in the New Testaments scant discussion of the Supper,6 the

contemporary Protestant churchs general disregard for the importance of the Supper is just as

unscriptural.7 The Lords Supper is not an optional nicety given by God to be performed a few

times a year in recognition of an earlier time in Church history. Rather, it is the churchs primary

sacrament of the new covenant;8 as such, it contains many layers of meaning in connection with

previous sacramental signs administered by God through the various Old Testament covenants.9

Only through an understanding of these previous sacraments can the unique significance of the

Lords Supper within the new covenant community be discerned. This paper explores the

importance of the sacraments in the Covenant of Works, the Abrahamic, and the Sinai Covenant

5
MacLeod, 16.

6
Everyone agrees that the Apostles did not outline a clear theology of the Supper. Paul only discusses it at some
length in his first letter to the Corinthians and Acts only mentions it a handful of times. This is in contrast to the
myriad discussions of preaching and teaching within the Apostles writings. It is clear, however, that the Supper
was one of the defining characteristics of their weekly worship gatherings (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:20).
7
Granted, this is a necessary generalization of the Protestant church. Some Protestant traditions, such as the
Anglican Church and some branches of the Presbyterian Church, have a higher regard for the Supper than many of
the more contemporary Protestant denominations who hardly celebrate the Supper at all. Nonetheless, it is my
contention that even within the more historical branches of the Protestant church, we have lost an overall sense of
the significance, meaning, and blessing of the Lords Supper.

8
It is significant that Christ forever linked His death and the initiation of the new covenant with the Supper as He
took the cup and pronounced this is the new covenant in my blood (Luke 22:20). While this doesnt downplay the
significance of baptism, the Supper is the recurring sacrament that represents the work of Christ.

9
Many of the Apostolic Fathers and Reformation Fathers make note of connections between Old Testament
sacraments and the Lords Supper in their sermons and writings. However, these have not been of primary reference
within the context of sacramentology as such, taking a backseat to philosophical theology and New Testament
systematic theology as the defining players in these discussions. This paper attempts to show that these connections
are essential to understanding what the Lords Supper really is and why it is the primary sacrament of the new
covenant.
 Johnson 3

and shows how these sacraments of previous covenant administrations elucidate the layers of

significance in the purpose, meaning, and essential blessing found within the Lords Supper.

Covenant and Sacrament

Even within the Reformed tradition, many disagree over the nature and primary function

of the sacraments. Luther regarded the sacraments as objective imparters of grace; Zwingli

regarded them merely as signs of faith; Calvin regarded them as signs and seals of the promises

of God.10 Yet the various understandings of what constitutes a sacrament changes how we

regard the significance of the Old Testament signs and seals of Gods various covenant

administrations for the new covenant believer. A lengthy argument for a direct continuity

between Old Testament sacraments and new covenant sacraments exceeds the scope of this

essay; assuming this continuity, this author affirms Bavincks definition of a sacrament as a

testimony of divine grace toward us confirmed by an outward sign, signs and seals of the

promises of God in his Word, mirrors in which we contemplate the riches of his grace.11 With

such a definition, the physical elements associated with the Old Testament covenant

administrations clearly function as sacraments, as physical manifestations of the spiritual reality

of Gods presence and grace. Just as the new covenant inaugurated by Christ at the last supper is

a fulfillment of the previous covenant administrations, so, too, the sacrament of the new

covenant is a fulfillment of the previous covenant sacraments. Thus as the Church understands

the functions of the previous sacraments, the theological significance of the Lords Supper is

elucidated.

The Tree of Life in the Covenant of Works

10
Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011), 654.

11
Bavinck, 654.
 Johnson 4

In order to understand the meaning and significance of Christs institution of the Lords

Supper as the sacrament of the new covenant (Luke 20:22), we must first understand the

sacrament associated with Gods first covenant with man in Genesis 2. 12 While the Tree of the

Knowledge of Good and Evil was the focal point of the Covenant of Works, the Tree of Life

featured as the covenants chief sacrament: a sign and seal of the life God promised to Adam if

he obeyed.13 Indeed, the Tree of Life was more significant to the man and woman than the Tree

of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, for while the latter only functioned within the law of God,

the Tree of Life was a symbol of the close relationship between God and Adam as a whole. The

Tree of Life, as the chief tree in the midst of the garden (Gen. 2:9), functioned as a reminder

that God was the giver of life and that life was found only in relationship with Him.14 Although

sinless, Adam nonetheless needed a symbol to remind him that he could not attain life within

himself, but that his life could be grasped only in as much as he was in relationship with God.15

12
The scope of the paper is too narrow to argue why Gods command for Adam to work the ground, multiply, and
refrain from eating of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil constitutes Gods first covenant with
mankind. This paper assumes a working covenant theology that acknowledges the notion of the Covenant of Works
that God made with Adam, as outlined in the Irish Articles (1615), the Westminster Confession (1647), the Helvetic
Consensus Formula (1675), and the Walcheren Articles (1693). For compelling arguments in favor of the existence
of the Covenant of Works, see: Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1888), II,
117; Geerhardus Vos The Doctrine of the Covenant in Reformed Theology, in Redemptive History and Biblical
Interpretation, ed. Richard B. Gaffin Jr. (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1980), 234-70; Louis Berkhof,
Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1996), 211-19.
13
Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1996), 217.

14
Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology (East Peoria, IL: Banner of Truth, 2012), 28.

15
John Calvin, Sermons on Genesis 1-11, trans. Rob Roy McGregor (East Peoria, IL: Banner of Truth, 2009), 164.
The Tree of Life did not magically impart eternal life as some erroneously believe; rather, trees in Scripture are
symbolic of the life found within God (Ps. 1:3; Jer. 17:8; Matt. 7:17), the Tree of Life being the archetype (Wenham
62). While it is true that the literal meaning of the Hebrew phrase can mean The tree whose fruit causes people to
live forever (Reyburn and Fry 65), it is clear that God was the Life-giver, just as it was God who cursed Adam and
Eve with death, not the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Just as the new covenant sacraments
do not impart life apart from the work of God working through them within the context of covenant relationship, so,
too, the Tree of Life had no life within itself, but merely functioned as a conduit of grace, pointing to the life given
from God Himself within the perfect relationship between creature and creator. If it is true that the Tree of Life is a
sign and seal of Gods covenant with Adam, reminding Adam that life comes from God, namely eternal life but also
relational liferather than it actually being a means of eternal life through the eating of it, and thus rendering Gods
curse void if Adam had simply taken and eaten of itthis substantiates the reason why transubstantiation is
 Johnson 5

Thus the Tree of Life was the antithesis of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, serving

as a symbol of the life found in an obedient relationship with God just as the Tree of the

Knowledge of Good and Evil served as the symbol of death for disobedience.16

Functioning as the symbol of life in God, the Tree of Life testifies to the character of the

pre-fall relationship between God and His people as one of giving and receiving. Life in the

Garden began with Gods gift of any food in the garden, except of one tree (Gen. 2:16). Eating

was made a central part of communion with God.17 The command to take and eat functioned

as one of Gods chief blessings, and in their taking and eating, they were offering up praise and

thanksgiving to their Creator and Sustainer. So when the serpent entered, he gave the same

command, offering them the forbidden fruit that God had not given them to eat, and in their

disregard for their covenant bond and the relationship mediated by Gods good gifts, the

covenant was broken, the relationship ripped apart, and the Tree of Life was no more theirs to

partake.18 They ceased to find their hunger assuaged in God, and relied on created thingsand

ultimately on their own handsto gain the life that could only be found in God.19 No longer

hungry for God, Adam and Eve were excommunicated from the Garden and separated from the

inconsistent with the nature of the Lords Supper, for it is a sign, seal, and reminder, not an actual physical object
that imparts grace of itself. William D. Reyburn and Euan McG. Fry, Genesis (New York: United Bible Society,
1997), 65. Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 (Waco: Word, 1987), 62.

16
Calvin, Sermons on Genesis 1-11, 167.

17
Alexander Schmemann, For the Life of the World (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimirs Seminar, 1973), 14.

18
Calvin rightly argues that Gods forbiddance of the Tree of Life after the fall was not because Adam and Eve
would actually be able to live forever if they had eaten of it. Rather, if they continued to have access to the
sacrament that represented perfect, life-giving relationship with God, they would have mistakenly thought that they
were still right with God and not reckon their sin and separation--the necessary first steps to renewing that right
relationship again. Calvin, Sermons on Genesis 1-11, 341.

19
Schmemann, 18.
 Johnson 6

Tree of Life so they might recognize the separation caused by their rebellion and might long to

find life in God once again.20

With Christs incarnation and fulfillment of the Covenant of Works as the Second Adam,

fellowship with God was restored and is symbolized in the Lords Supper as the sacrament of the

new covenant. Christ has taken what Satan had perverted and renews and redeems Gods

command in the Garden to take and eat; for as we partake of Christ, the true Tree of Life, the

covenant relationship is restored once again. Christ gave Himself to restore fellowship with us,

becoming a sacramentthe sign and the thing signified, the hope of eternal life and eternal life

itself.21

In the Lords Supper, we have a sacrament like the Tree of Life, a testimony that the

Church has life in God and communion with Him once again: it is a sign and seal of Gods

saving grace through the work of Christ, serving as a reminder that we can only find true

spiritual life and nourishment of our souls if we take and eat of Him (Jn. 6:56).22 Like the Tree

of Life, it is a reminder that we share in the life of Christ, that we possess nothing in ourselves,

that He is our fullness, that we find our nourishment in Him alone.23 He is our bread and our

wine, and God has said that we may surely eat of it (Gen. 2:16). And so as we take and eat of

20
Calvin, Sermons on Genesis 1-11, 339-40.

21
John Keble sees the Tree of Life as a foreshadowing of the cross, the tree of cursing that brought us life. This
provides another beautiful layer to the story of redemption and the types and symbols found within the Old
Testament that testified to what God was ordaining through the plan of redemption. John Keble. 2000. The Old
Testament Types of the Cross: The Tree of Life, Pro Ecclesia 9, no. 4: 430 ATLA Religion Database with
ATLASerials EBSCOhost (Accessed March 17, 2015).

22
John Calvin, Treatises on the Sacraments, trans. Henry Beveridge (Grand Rapids: Christian Heritage, 2002), 186.

23
Calvin Sermons on Genesis 1-11, 342.
 Johnson 7

the bread and the wine, we are reminded that daily we must come to the throne of grace to find

life and fellowship mediated through Christ, our Tree of Life.24

The Abrahamic Covenant

The Lords Supper does not only communicate life in fellowship with God through

Christ, however. As seen in connection with the sacrament of the Abrahamic Covenant, the

Lords Supper is also an aid of faith and a confirmation of Gods covenant fidelity. Unlike the

Covenant of Works or the Davidic Covenant, which God gives in a single moment, the covenant

with Abraham was an extended process full of promises, stipulations, reiterations, signs, and

seals across decades of Abrams life and a significant portion of the Genesis text. Beginning

with Gods promises of a great nation and a great land (Gen. 12:1-3), Abram was thrust into a

lifelong struggle of receiving Gods promises yet not seeing them fulfilled, sometimes resulting

in disobedience (Gen. 12:10-20; 16:1-4) or question (Gen. 15). In Abram raged the great battle

for faith in the midst of Gods covenant promises; thus Gods response in the midst of his

struggle testifies to one of the great purposes of the sacraments for faith in the promises of God.

The administration of the covenant and the fulfillment of any aspect of the covenant promises

took decades, so that God might establish with Abram something far greater than a mere

promise-stipulation, suzerain-vassal association. He was establishing a relationship grounded in

faith in the person of YHWH.25 For Abram, faith was a way of life within relationship to the

24
We will not always need the Lords Supper as a reminder that our life subsists only in Christ, for the Tree of Life
will be ours once again (Rev. 22:2), this time with a diversity of fruit, symbolic of the complete and abundant life
found within the intimate relationship of the marriage union with Christ forever enjoyed in the New Jerusalem. And
so as we partake of the Lords Supper on this earth, we look forward to partaking of the Tree of Life in the New
Jerusalem within the context of a perfect and complete communion with Christ.

25
Vos, 84.
 Johnson 8

God of the covenant.26 While God was giving Abram promises, the act of withholding the

fulfillment required that Abram rest not in the promises, but in the promising God alone.27

This is made clear in the three theophanies in Genesis 12, 15, and 17all in connection with the

commencement of Gods covenant.28 In each case, God appeared to Abram and confirmed His

covenant (Gen. 12:7; 15:17; 17:1), using these theophanies as sacraments intended to

communicate Gods intense attachment and commitment to His peoplean affirmation that He

was truly with His people.29

In this context, the significance of Genesis 15 becomes clear. When God appeared to

Abram, He found him in a state of faith-filled doubt, trusting that God had truly promised him an

heir and a land, but struggling with the reality that neither of these things had come to pass (Gen.

15:2-8). So God acted through theophany to further join Himself to His promises, the being of

God to the word of God, in order to establish a relationship that was based not on faith in the

promisesfaith in what can be proven through fulfillmentbut faith in God Himself: Fear not,

Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward (Gen. 15:1). 30 And to confirm and

seal this promise, God appeared in the form of a smoking oven and a flaming torch (Gen.

26
Vos, 83.

27
Vos, 87.

28
Vos, 69-75. It is significant to note that these theophanies comprise the first theophanies recorded in Scripture.
God is indicating the extreme importance of this covenant with Abram, joining Himself in relationship to His
covenant people through these manifestations.

29
Vos, 74.

30
We must not pass over Gods words too quickly, for in His words God was offering His very Self. In this, God
further emphasized the fact that He was giving Himself to Abram and Abrams people as the chief object of the
promise. God was bringing about a restoration of the relationship that was broken at the Falland even beginning
the process of establishing a deeper, greater union through the incarnation, passion, and future consummation.
 Johnson 9

15:17).31 As theophany, God passed through the severed pieces, submitting Himself to the curse

if the covenant was broken.32 God forever joined Himself to His promises, placing all the burden

of fulfilment on Himself, that the patriarchs couldnt separate the promises from God Himself

(Heb. 6:13).33 And because of this, the promises carried with it the certainty that since God

cannot break His promises or fail to complete His will, it is as if the promises had already been

fulfilled: He cannot deny Himself (2 Tim. 2:13). This is evident in the language God uses

concerning the Promised Land, literally stating to your descendants I have given this land

(Gen. 15:18).34 Thus the sacraments of theophany became a sign and seal of Gods promises to

Abram, and through these physical manifestations of Gods presence and promise, Abram found

his faith established and confirmed.

As the sacrament of the new covenant, the Lords Supper serves in a similar way.35 As

we approach the table, we come needing the confirmation of Gods promises to us that He is our

Possession, our Redeemer, our God. And through the Supper, God affirms that He has joined

31
Calvin interprets these two theophanies as symbolic: the oven as judgment and suffering, the torch as hope and
joy. Indeed, there is much scriptural precedent for this interpretation. Fire and ovens are typically representative of
Gods judgment or the suffering of othersGod even refers to Egypt as a furnace from which He rescued His
people (Deut. 4:20), and light is typically representative of hope or the presence of God, as with the lampstand in the
temple. If this is a proper interpretation of the two theophanies, then we see a direct connection with the significance
of the Lords Supper which reminds us of our sinwhich merits the judgment of God and once functioned as our
slave-masterand also testifies to us the hope found in the Person of Christ, the Light of the World. Calvin,
Sermons on Genesis 11-20, trans. Rob Roy McGregor (East Peoria, IL: Banner of Truth, 2009), 453-55.

32
Vos, 86.

33
Vos, 86. Vos rightly notes that since God refrained from fulfilling the promises right away Abram had to put His
faith in God; for had the promises been quickly fulfilled then the danger would have immediately arisen of their
acquiring importance and value apart from God. Vos, 86-87.

34
James Montgomery Boice, Genesis: Vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 564.

35
The disciples were in an even deeper state of unbelief than Abram, for they did not even realize what it was that
Christ was promising to do for them (Luk. 18:34), so Christ gave the Lords Supper to them as a sacrament to
continually practice among them in order to continually impart a deeper understanding of what Christ had done and
a deeper faith in the significance of Christs death.
 Johnson 10

His word to Himself in the Person of Christ, the Eternal Word, and that all things are yes and

amen in Him (2 Cor. 1:20). Through Christ, God bore the curse for our covenant-breaking,

fulfilling His promises to bless us and to take our curse. In Christ is the fulfillment of the

promise of an Heir, and through this Heir, we find possession of God Himself, confirmed as we

partake of Him in the supper as the ultimate sign of relational fidelity. In the Lords Supper we

celebrate the acquisition of God, the fulfillment of the promises, but also the anticipation of

greater union with Christ and the fullest expression of this relationship.

So we come to the Table, recognizing that in Christ we have a testimony that God is with

us and has confirmed His promises through Christ. As Robertson states,

In [Christ] God is with us. He offers his own body and his own blood as victim of the

covenantal curses. His flesh is torn that Gods word to the patriarch might be fulfilled.

Now he offers himself to you. He says: Take, eat; this is my body. This is my blood of

the covenant shed for many. Drink, all of you, of it.36

We approach the Table in need of covenant confirmation and renewal of faith,37 and by partaking

of the bread and the cup, we receive sacraments that represent Christ, the ultimate sacrament,

God made flesh, who confirms to us the fulfillment of Gods covenant with Abram and the

promise of a future fulfillment when we will be united with Christ and live in sweet fellowship

with Him in the New Jerusalem.38

36
O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1980), 146.

37
Olive Wyon rightly asserts that the value of the Eucharist lies in the act of God: in the fact that God has done all,
before we knew anything about it; it does not depend upon our faith; indeed, it is this act of God which creates and
evokes faith. The Sacrament is based upon something which God has doneonce for all. Olive Wyon, The Alter
Fire (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1954), 17.

38
Vos, 74.
 Johnson 11

Passover and the Sinai Covenant

The meaning of the Lords Supper draws even deeper significance in the Paschal meal,

the sacramental meal of the Sinai Covenant. 39 The many layers of symbolism in the Passover

and the surrounding Exodus narrative elucidates the layers of meaning in the Lords Supper as

commemoration of Christs death as our Paschal Lamb (Is. 53:7; 1 Cor. 5:7). Thus the more we

understand what the Paschal meal and the Sinai Covenant symbolized for Covenant Israel, the

richer the meaning of the Lords Supper can have for the New Covenant Church.

Faced with the impending arrival of the Angel of Death to take the souls of the firstborn

in Egypt, the Hebrews marked their doors with the blood of an unblemished lamb as a symbol

that they were sealed as the people of God under their covenant relationship with YHWH.40 The

sacrifice of the Paschal lamb was a sacrifice of atonement and a sacrament testifying to Gods

presence and relationship with His people.41 The blood did not create a covenant relationship

with YHWH; rather, it was a physical manifestation of a spiritual reality, a sign pointing to their

existing relationship with Him.42 The sign on the doorpost and the Passover meal eaten that

night were not only sacraments of their covenant relationship with YHWH, however; they were

also sacramental elements that joined the Hebrews to each other as one nation under YHWH, for

39
We see clearly that the exodus from Egypt is the commencement of the Sinai Covenant, made so by Gods
continual reference to that event as the establishment of His authority to make the covenant and His fidelity to keep
the covenant (Ex. 19-20). Thus the Paschal feast is the sacrament associated with the commencement of the Sinai
Covenant, just as the theophanies were the sacraments associated with the commencement of the Abrahamic
Covenant, signs and seals of Gods promises and faithfulness to fulfill those promises.

40
John Currid. Exodus: Vol. 1 (Auburn, MA: Evangelical, 2000), 241.

41
Bavinck, 676.

42
Currid, Exodus: Vol. 2 Exodus Vol. 2 (Auburn, MA: Evangelical, 2000), 244. The Egyptians, of course, did not
have the covenant sign, and so they were not free from the judgment. If we equate this with the Lords Supper as a
symbol of being sealed under the covenant relationship with God, then we understand why it is just as inappropriate
for an unbeliever to partake of communion. They are trying to cover themselves with the blood of Christ without
having established a covenant relationship with Him.
 Johnson 12

in the institution of the Passover Feast, we find the first reference to Israel as a congregation and

community, indicating the unity of the people under the covenant for the first time (Ex. 12:3-

6).43 Among the elements of the Paschal feast were the bread, symbolizing the bread brought

with the Hebrews as they sojourned out of Egypt, and wine, symbolizing the blood of the Paschal

lamb, shed for the salvation of the people from the Angel of Death.44 For the community of

Israel, the Paschal meal became a significant reminder of the salvation from Egypt and the

commencement of the Sinai Covenant.

Like the Paschal meal, the actions taken by Moses and the elders of Israel in the giving of

the Law and the ratification of the Sinai Covenant with the community of Israel have direct

significance on the meaning of the Lords Supper. Before the reading of the law, they sacrificed

burnt offerings that symbolized atonement for sin and peace offerings that symbolized the peace

between YHWH and the community of Israel (Ex. 24:5).45 The newly established law was read

before the people and the covenant confirmed by their covenantal agreement (Ex. 24:7). The

acceptance of the law was followed by the sprinkling of the blood upon the community of Israel

accompanied by Moses words: Behold, the blood of the covenant that YHWH has made with

you in accordance with all these words (Ex. 24:8). This important act stressed the significance

of the covenant as a life-and-death agreement based fundamentally on the law just given to the

people.46 After the law is read and the blood-oath established, the elders ascended the mountain

and communed with God, beholding Him in a theophany and enjoying His presence in a

43
Currid, Exodus: Vol. 1, 239-41.

44
Currid, Exodus: Vol. 1, 253.

45
Currid, Exodus: Vol. 2 136.

46
Currid, Exodus: Vol. 2, 138.
 Johnson 13

covenant meal that celebrated the peace between God and His covenant people (Gen. 24:9-11).47

This was nothing other than a sacramental meal in the presence of God that testified to Gods full

commitment to His covenant administration and, more specifically, to His special relationship

with His chosen people.

Within this context, the meaning of the Lords Supper to the disciplesand for the

Church since its commencementcomes into focus. It is no accident that Christs Passion took

place over Passover and that Christ instituted the Lords Supper at the end of the Paschal meal

with His disciples.48 Scripture could not be clearer in its connection of the Lords Supper to the

Paschal meal and Christs death with the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb. Thus Christ commands

the Church to partake of the Supper in remembrance of Him just as Israel was commanded to

keep the Paschal meal every year in remembrance of the exodus from Egypt (Ex. 12:14).49 For

in partaking of the Lords Supper, we celebrate and remember the sacrifice of Christ made as our

atoning Passover Lamb whose blood shelters us from Gods judgment and whose sacrifice

releases us from the slavery of sin and establishes a new covenant.50 Just as Passover was the

feast that prepared and made possible the beginning of the journey to the Promised Land and the

Mosaic Covenant (Jer. 31:32), Christ is the new Passover meal inaugurating the new covenant,

and in partaking of His death and resurrection, we celebrate our entrance into an eternal

47
Currid, Exodus: Vol. 2, 139. Again, we see a theophany in association with Gods covenant administrations,
testifying to the presence of God with His people and His fidelity to the covenant.

48
Bavinck, 677.

49
Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, trans. John Richard De Witt (Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans, 1997), 421.

50
Bavinck, 678.
 Johnson 14

Promised Land, which is Himself (Heb. 4:3).51 And just as the blood on the doorposts was a

symbol of a preexisting covenant relationship, so, too, the Lords Supper is a sign that we are

already Gods people. We partake of this meal often to remind us that the effects of Christs

sacrifice have continual significance for us today, as Ridderbos attests:

It is not a question here only of the commemoration of what has once taken place in the

past, but no less of its abiding, actual redemptive significance. Christs self-surrender is

now, as hitherto the exodus of Israel our of Egypt, the new and definitive fact of

redemption which in the eating of the bread and in the drinking of the wine the church

may accept as such again and again from the hand of God.52

Like Israel, we are prone to forget our past slavery and by whose Hand we were brought out;

thus the recurrent act of the Lords Supper provides a humbling reminder of our continued

dependence on Christ as our Savior slain for us and the God of the Covenant who has brought us

into new life in Him.53

The Lords Supper also, like the Passover, establishes the communal relationship

between God and His people, and joins the covenant people together in unity. As Bavinck states,

Like the Passover, the Lords Supper is a meal where God meets with his people and, on the

basis of the sacrifice made and accepted, unites himself with them, and meets his people in joyful

51
Eugene H. Merrill. 2000. Remembering: A Central Theme in Biblical Worship, Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 43, no. 1: 35. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials EBSCOhost (Accessed March 17,
2015).

52
Ridderbos, 421.

53
It is important to recognize the order of events in the Sinai Covenant: first God rescues His people through
sacrifice and then He gives them a law to follow as they enjoy His benefits while dwelling in the Promised Land. So,
too, we must not stop at remembering Christ at the Lords Supper, but rather we must prepare ourselves to accept
the responsibilities of obedience and covenant fidelity that come with our new life in Christ, as emphasized in
numerous New Testament passages (Rom. 8:1; Rom. 12:1; 1 Cor. 6:20; Eph. 2:10; Eph. 4:1; Heb. 12).
 Johnson 15

celebration.54 It provides the foundation for the community of the Church, and as such is the

foundation and criterion for the unity of the church as the new people of God.55 Thus as we

partake of the meal as a corporate body, we celebrate that Christ has established a new family

that transcends bloodlines, all united under the blood of Christ.56

The Lords Supper finds further meaning in the ratification in blood of the Sinai

Covenant and the covenant meal enjoyed by the elders of Israel.57 Just as the shedding of blood

was central to the Sinai covenant (Heb. 9:18-22), which established the Israelite community, so

the sacrifice of Christ is central to this new relationship with God and His people that establishes

a new community united under the blood of Christ.58 Christs words this is the new covenant in

my blood clearly connect with Moses words associated with the sprinkling of blood on the

people of Israel;59 and so in His blood He takes upon Himself the curse of our breaking of the

Sinai covenant, just as He took the curse of the Abrahamic Covenant. Christ is the burnt offering

of atonement and the peace offering, testifying to us that there is now peace between God and

His people through Christs atoning work on the cross. And within this context, we can sit down

and partake of the meal of communion like the elders of Israel, celebrating this peace.60 In the

54
Bavinck, 676.

55
Ridderbos, 423.
56
Malcolm Maclean, The Lords Supper (Fearn, Scotland: Mentor, 2009), 23.

57
It is also significant to note that Christ is the greater Moses who has initiated a greater covenant, and this with His
own blood, rather than the blood of an animal (Heb. 3:3).

58
Ridderbos, 423.

Bernard J. Cooke. 1960. Synoptic Presentation of the Eucharist as Covenant Sacrifice, Theological Studies 21,
59

no.1: 33. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials EBSCOhost (Accessed March 17, 2015).

60
Currid, Exodus: Vol. 2, 140. Bavinck notes that Jesus institution of the Supper would have been immediately
after the taking of the third cup in the Paschal meal, which was the Cup of Thanksgiving. Bavinck, 677.
 Johnson 16

Lords Supper, we have the sacrament of the New Covenant that is better than the Sinai

Covenant (Jer. 31:31-33), reminding us that we are forgiven by the blood of Christ, that we are in

the covenant, and that God dwells with us.61

Approaching the Table

We must not ignore the Lords Supper and fail to recognize its great significance for the

Community of Faith. For as we approach the Table, we come recognizing our need of

forgiveness for covenant-breaking, celebrating the restored covenant relationship in Christ,

remembering that God is our life and length of days, communing with the covenant family of

God, and reaffirming our feeble faith in the God of the New Covenant who has promised us

immeasurable riches through Christ, our Tree of Life, our Torch, our Passover Lamb. We

approach the Table in humility, recognizing with Adam that our life comes only from Christ.

We approach the Table in faith-filled doubt like Abram, needing our faith in the promise of

forgiveness through Christ renewed and confirmed. We approach the Table in repentance like

Israel, recognizing our need of atonement. We approach the Table with thanksgiving like the

Elders, celebrating our peace with God through Christ. We approach the Table as one united

Church, the community of the covenant people of God, joined in recognition and celebration that

God has brought us out of the slavery of sin and into the promised land of His presence,

anticipating that great day when God himself with dwell with us and will serve us a new supper

in celebration of the marriage union of God and His covenant people (Rev. 19-21).

61
Currid, Exodus: Vol. 1, 254.
 Johnson 17

Bibliography

Bavinck, Herman. Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011.

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1996.

Boice, James Montgomery. Genesis: Vol. 2. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002.

Calvin, John. Sermons on Genesis 1-11. Trans. Rob Roy McGregor. East Peoria, IL: Banner of

Truth, 2009.

---. Sermons on Genesis 11-20. Trans. Rob Roy McGregor. East Peoria, IL: Banner of Truth,

2009.

---. Treatises on the Sacraments. Trans. Henry Beveridge. Grand Rapids: Christian Heritage,

2002.

Cooke, Bernard J. Synoptic Presentation of the Eucharist as Covenant Sacrifice, Theological

Studies 21, no.1 (March 1, 1960): 1-44. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials

EBSCOhost (Accessed March 17, 2015).

Currid, John. Exodus Vol. 2. Auburn, MA: Evangelical, 2000.

Currid, John. Exodus: Vol. 1. Auburn, MA: Evangelical, 2000.

Holifield, E. Brooks. The Covenant Sealed: The Development of Puritan Sacramental Theology

in Old and New England, 1570-1720. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2002.

Keble, John. The Old Testament Types of the Cross: The Tree of Life. Pro Ecclesia 9, no. 4

(Fall 2000): 429-433. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials EBSCOhost (Accessed

March 17, 2015).

Maclean, Malcolm. The Lords Supper. Fearn, Scotland: Mentor, 2009.

MacLeod, Donald. The Lords Supper as a Means of Grace N.P. N.D.

Merrill, Eugene H. Remembering: A Central Theme in Biblical Worship. Journal of the

 Johnson 18

Evangelical Theological Society 43, no. 1 (March 1, 2000): 27-36. ATLA Religion

Database with ATLASerials EBSCOhost (Accessed March 17, 2015).

Reyburn, William D. and Euan McG. Fry. Genesis. New York: United Bible Society, 1997.

Ridderbos, Herman. Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Trans. John Richard De Witt. Grand

Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1997.

Robertson, O. Palmer. The Christ of the Covenants. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and

Reformed, 1980.

Schmemann, Alexander. For the Life of the World. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimirs Seminar,

1973.

Vos, Geerhardus. Biblical Theology. East Peoria, IL: Banner of Truth, 2012.

Wenham, Gordon J. Genesis 1-15. Waco: Word, 1987.

Wyon, Olive. The Alter Fire. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1954.