I drink it new with you in the Realm of my Father.’”—Matt. 26:26-29, Mo.

18. Were the bread and wine transubstantiated? So how were they used?

¹⁸ By this we see that Jesus did not say that the bread and wine had been transubstantiated into his literal body and blood; no more than that the cup had been transformed into the new covenant when he said: “This cup means the new covenant ratified by my blood shed for your sake.” (Luke 22:20, Mo) The bread and wine are merely emblems. They undergo no change by the words pronounced over them, but by such words they are explained to mean something else. What? Jesus said, “my body” and “my blood shed for your sake”.

19. What is Paul’s commentary on their meaning at 1 Corinthians 10?

¹⁹ For commentary on these words we turn to Paul, where he says: “Therefore, my beloved ones, flee from idolatry. I speak as to men with discernment; judge for yourselves what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of the Christ? The loaf which we break, is it not a sharing in the body of the Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, although many, are one body, for we are all partaking of that one loaf.” (1 Cor. 10:14-17, NW) For comparison we quote another version of these words, Moffatt’s: “Shun idolatry, then, my beloved. I am speaking to sensible people; weigh my words for yourselves. The cup of blessing, which we bless, is that not participating in the blood of Christ? The bread we break, is that not participating in the body of Christ? (for, many as we are, we are one Bread, one Body, since we all partake of the one Bread).” With Moffatt’s rendering the American Standard Version agrees; also Rotherham, Darby, Cuthbert Lattey, the New World Translation’s margin, etc.a

20. To what was Jesus referring by his words “my body”? What scriptures bear this out?

²⁰ From this inspired testimony it is evident that at the Memorial the Lord Jesus was referring to the “congregation, which is his body”. It is, as Jesus said, “my body,” because God “subjected all things under his feet, and made him head over all things to the congregation, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills up all things in all”. (Eph. 1:22, 23, NW) In further explanation the apostle Paul writes in his same first letter to the Corinthians, saying: “For just as the body is one thing but has many members, and all the members of that body, although being many, are one body, so also is the Christ. For truly by one spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink one spirit. But now God has set the members in the body, each one of them, just as he pleased. If they were all one member, where would the body be? . . . the head cannot say to the feet: ‘I have no need of you.’ . . . Now you are Christ’s body, and members individually. And God has set the respective ones in the congregation.”—1 Cor. 12:12, 13, 18, 19, 21, 27, 28, NW.

21. So what does partaking of the loaf mean? Whom does this debar?

²¹ Hence when a Christian is really devoted to God and eats of the Memorial bread, he is thereby confessing that he is “sharing in the body of the Christ”; he is a member of it. Has he glorified or exalted himself publicly to membership in the spiritual body of Christ? No; but he has met God’s requirements and he recognizes that “God has set” him in the body of Christ. This in itself rules out all the “other sheep” from partaking of the Memorial emblems, as they are not members of Christ’s body. They cannot partake and say: “Because there is one loaf, we, although many, are one body,” that is, “one body” with the members of Christ’s body.

22. What must therefore exist between partakers of the loaf? How?

²² The body of Christ was represented by the “one loaf”, and the members of that spiritual body “are all partaking of that one loaf”. For that reason there must be complete unity among them, for “we, although many, are one body”. (1 Cor. 10:17, NW) Our unity must be not merely with one another, but particularly with the Head Jesus Christ. He is the Principal One. We must remember him. We must keep “holding fast to the head, to the one from whom all the body, being supplied and harmoniously joined together by means of its joints and ligaments, goes on growing with the growth which God gives”. (Col. 2:19, NW) It was because of arguing this vital matter of unity in his first letter to the Corinthians that the apostle suddenly made reference in the tenth chapter to the Lord’s evening meal, or the Memorial. He held before them as a warning example the Israelites in the wilderness who fell away from Jehovah God to the worship of idols representing demons, so committing spiritual as well as physical fornication. He then warned his fellow Christians to “flee from idolatry”. As an argument for them to do this he told them to consider what he had to say about the Lord’s evening meal. The basic thought of that meal was oneness with Christ.

Participation with Demons Forbidden

1. With what argument against demonism does Paul follow up his explanation of the Lord’s evening meal?

THE apostle Paul followed up his explanation of the Lord’s evening meal saying: “Because there is one loaf, we, although many, are one body, for we are all partaking of that one loaf. Look at that which is Israel in a fleshly way: Are not those who eat the sacrifices sharers with [or, in] the altar? What, then, am I to say? That what is sacrificed to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? No; but I say that the things which the nations sacrifice they sacrifice to demons, and not to God, and I do not want you to become sharers with the demons [to participate in demons, Mo]. You cannot be drinking the cup of Jehovah and the cup of demons; you cannot be partaking of ‘the table of Jehovah’ and the table of demons. Or ‘are we inciting Jehovah to jealousy’? We are not stronger than he is, are we?”—1 Cor. 10:17-22, NW.

2. How did ancient Israelites share with God’s altar?

² In ancient Israel, when they offered peace-offerings and thank-offerings, the offerers as well as the priests ate parts of the sacrifices. The sacrifice to God represented the person offering it, to illustrate that a life must go for his life; and by eating part of the sacrifice he was partaking of the sacrifice with the altar. He was sharing with the altar, ‘participating in the altar.’ (Mo) The altar got part of the sacrifice, for some parts of it, the fat, etc., were burned upon the altar; and the person offering the sacrifice through the priest got part of the sacrifice. It was offered to Jehovah God; and as the altar was His, the offerer and the Lord God had fellowship together. (Lev. 19:5, 6; 22:29, 30; Deut. 12:17, 18; 27:5-7) So peaceful relations were either renewed or furthered between God and the offerer.