Lords Table Meeting

[Administrator]

 
The bread-breaking meeting is the most important meeting of the church. It is a matter of utmost seriousness because it involves the one unique Body of Christ. It is the practical symbol of our oneness and, as such, deserves our greatest care and study.

The symbol of the oneness that we enjoy is seen in the bread at the Lord's table, which signifies not only the physical body of the Lord Jesus given in His death for our redemption, but also the mystical Body of Christ produced through His resurrection for His unique expression. When we partake of the bread at the Lord's table, we identify ourselves with the crucified and resurrected Lord and with His universal Body, and we declare to the entire universe that we stand as one, apart from all division. To partake of the bread is to touch the Lord's heart, for the bread and our joint participation in it touch the Lord's Body, for which He gave His life.

It is sad that in recent years, some among us have risen up to establish tables in reckless disregard of the feeling of the Body and opposed to the fellowship of the elders of the church. By misquoting the Bible and misrepresenting the ministry, some saints have been misled to think that such a practice is both scriptural and based on the ministry, as the proponents have repeatedly trumpeted. A number of churches and saints have voiced concern about this and seek to find clear fellowship about these matters, particularly the practice of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting. In this article of two parts, we shall present from the Word and the ministry what the proper bread-breaking and the meeting to break bread really are.

The Bread-Breaking Meeting Being Instituted by the Lord

On the night the Lord Jesus was betrayed, He had supper with His disciples. As they were eating, the Lord took the bread and blessed it. Having given thanks, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, saying, ?Take, eat. This is My body, which is given for you. Do this unto the remembrance of Me.? Similarly, after they had dined, He took the cup and gave thanks. Then He gave it to them and said, ?Drink of it, all of you. This cup is the new covenant established in My blood, which is being poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. Do this, as often as you drink it, unto the remembrance of Me? (Cf. Matt. 26:26-28; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-25).

The Lord Jesus instituted the bread-breaking meeting after He and His disciples had eaten the Passover (Matt. 26:20-25; Luke 22:14-18). He did that to replace the Feast of Passover because He was going to fulfill the type and be the real Passover to us (1 Cor. 5:7). Today, as we attend the bread-breaking meeting, we are keeping the real Feast of Unleavened Bread (Matt. 26:17; 1 Cor. 5:8), which was a seven-day feast (Lev. 23:6) also known as the Passover (Luke 22:1; Mark 14:1). The Feast of Passover was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Exo. 12:15-20; 13:6-7). Hence, we must come together on the Lord?s Day, the first day of the week, to the bread-breaking meeting, for it is a replacement and continuation of the Old Testament Feast of Passover. The New Testament feast of the Lord?s table will only be replaced and continued by the feast in the coming kingdom of God when the Savior will feast with the overcoming saints upon His return (Luke 22:30; 13:28-29).

In view of this, the Lord commanded the disciples to ?do this? to remember Him, instilling in them the importance He gave to their coming together to eat the bread and drink of the cup to remember Him until He comes back (1 Cor. 11:26). Israel?s keeping of the Passover to remember their deliverance from slavery in Egypt to have a new start typifies the believers? keeping of the Lord?s table to remember the Lord?s redemption and salvation (Matt. 26:26-28) while awaiting our full redemption upon His return. Moreover, as the Feast of Tabernacles was a remembrance to the Israelites of how God had provided their fathers with tents to live in during their wandering years in the wilderness (Lev. 23:39-43) while expecting to enter into the rest of the promised good land, the Lord?s table is also our remembrance of the Lord?s provisions and leading during our sojourning in the temporary dwelling place on this earth to enter into the New Jerusalem in the new heaven and new earth which is our eternal habitation (Rev. 21:3).

The bread-breaking meeting consists of the remembrance of the Lord in the first part and the worship of the Father in the second part. According to the procedure in God?s salvation, we first receive the Lord and then draw near to the Father. After we have partaken of the bread and the cup, we the many sons of God should be led by the Lord who is designated God?s Firstborn Son to worship the Father together in our spirit.

Eating the Lord?s Supper Mainly to Remember the Lord

The first aspect of the bread-breaking meeting is eating the Lord?s supper. It pertains to a relationship between us and the Lord and can be called the vertical aspect of the bread-breaking meeting. The emphasis of eating the Lord?s supper is the remembrance of the Lord (1 Cor. 11:20, 23-25). By eating the Lord?s bread and drinking of the Lord?s cup, we eat the Lord?s supper in remembrance of the Lord.

In the aspect of the Lord?s supper, the bread signifies the Lord?s individual physical body that He gave for us (1 Cor. 11:23). The bread also denotes life ? the eternal life of God (John 6:33-35, 48). Thus, the bread is a symbol signifying the Lord?s body, which was broken on the cross to release His life in order that we may participate in it. When we see or receive the bread, we remember how His body was given to us (1 Cor. 11:24) so that we may have His eternal life, and how His body was broken for us so that He could be distributed as bread to us.

The cup signifies the new covenant that the Lord enacted for us by shedding His blood (1 Cor. 11:25). Whenever we see or receive this cup, we should consider how the Lord partook of flesh and blood for us (Heb. 2:14), how He gave His body for us that we may have His life, and how He shed His blood for us that we may be redeemed from our fallen condition back to God and to God?s full blessing. By this symbol, we should consider how the Lord bore our sins, was made sin for us, and was judged and cursed for us, shedding His blood, which constitutes our cup of blessing, our eternal blessed portion. We should also consider how we are redeemed, forgiven, sanctified, justified, reconciled, and accepted by God through the Lord?s blood, how it cleanses us from our sins and washes our conscience that we may come to God with boldness, how it speaks better things before God, and how it resists the attacks from the evil spirits for us that we may overcome the devil who accuses us.

While the bread on the table is identified as the bread, the blood on the table is not identified as the blood, but as the cup. If the cup was referred to as the blood, it would denote only redemption. However, the significance of the cup encompasses much more than merely redemption. In the Bible the cup signifies a portion, a blessing (1 Cor. 10:16), which is God Himself as the believers? portion (Psa. 16:5) which we obtain from God. Formerly in Adam we were sinful and evil, and the portion that we deserved from God is the cup of God?s wrath (Rev. 14:10; 21:8). However, the Lord drank this cup for us on the cross (John 18:11). He shed His blood to fully redeem us from our sins. Hence, His salvation became our portion (Lam. 3:24; Col. 1:12), which is the cup of salvation (Psa. 116:13), and our cup of blessing that runs over (Psa. 23:5). Its content is God Himself as our all-inclusive blessing. Thus, by drinking of the cup, we remember how the Lord poured out His blood to redeem us that our sins may be forgiven (Matt. 26:28) and that we may experience God Himself and all that He has as our eternal blessed portion.

The Lord knows how easily we forget Him. Although the grace we received is so great and the redemption we obtained so wonderful, we would often still forget Him. For this reason He charged us to remember Him. By eating the bread and drinking the cup, we take in the redeeming Lord as our portion and as our life and blessing. This is to remember the Lord in a genuine way.

Eating the Lord?s Supper Also to Display His Death

Whenever we eat the Lord?s bread and drink of His cup, we simultaneously remember the Lord and display His death (1 Cor. 11:26). Originally, the blood was in the flesh. When the blood is separated from the flesh, it means death has occurred. The bread refers to the Lord?s body, and the cup, to His blood. The bread and the cup, displayed separately on the table, signify death. Since the separation of the body and the blood signifies death, death is thus displayed. While we are remembering the Lord, we display the Lord?s death for ourselves and for others to see, including the angels.

With the display of Christ?s death, we display and announce Christ?s all-inclusive termination of twelve items on the cross: the angelic life (Col. 1:20), the fallen human life (Gal. 2:20), Satan (Heb. 2:14; John 12:31), the kingdom of Satan (Col. 2:15; John 12:31), sin (2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 8:3), sins (1 Pet. 2:24; Isa. 53:6), the world (Gal. 6:14; John 12:31), death (Heb. 2:14), flesh (Gal. 5:24), the old man (Rom. 6:6), self (Gal. 2:20), and all things or creation (Col. 1:20). By the death of the Lord, all negative things have come to an end, and their end is displayed openly.

We should take the Lord?s supper unto the remembrance of Him by declaring His redeeming death continually until He comes back to set up God?s kingdom (Matt. 26:29). In His first coming, the Lord accomplished His death to carry out an all-inclusive redemption for the producing of the church. After His death, He went away to receive the kingdom, and will come again with the kingdom (Dan. 7:13-14; Luke 19:12). The period between His first and second comings is the church age. The church, thus, bridges the gap between the Lord?s two comings and connects His death in the past with God?s kingdom in the future. Hence, to declare the Lord?s death until He comes implies the declaring of the existence of the church for the bringing in of the kingdom.

When we eat the Lord?s supper with a view of continually remembering Him in His first and second comings, and in a spirit and atmosphere of hoping and waiting for His return, that supper becomes a real satisfaction to Him in relation to the kingdom, God?s administration.

Attending the Lord?s Table to Fellowship with the Saints

The second aspect of the bread-breaking meeting is attending the Lord?s table. It conveys a relationship between us and the saints and can be called the horizontal aspect of the bread-breaking meeting. While eating the Lord?s supper is for us to remember the Lord, attending the Lord?s table is for all the members of the Body of Christ to fellowship in the Lord (1 Cor. 10:16-17) in His accomplishments for us, the stress of which is on the fellowship among the saints. Its emphasis is not just the individual drinking of the blood of Christ but a joint participation in His blood. This joint participation is the fellowship.

Our eating and partaking of one bread and drinking and sharing of one cup imply mutual fellowship. Such fellowship becomes the fellowship of the blood of Christ and the fellowship of the Body of Christ. When we eat and drink together, sharing in the Lord?s bread and the Lord?s cup, we ?partake of the table of the Lord? (1 Cor. 10:21). That is why we must partake of the Lord?s table together with other saints; otherwise, we would only have the vertical aspect of the bread-breaking meeting.

At this table, we share in the Lord?s body and the Lord?s blood with all the saints and have fellowship with one another. Fellowship refers to the believers? communion in the joint participation in the blood and body of Christ. This fellowship makes us, the participants in the Lord?s blood and body, one with the Lord and one with one another. We, the participants, make ourselves identified with the Lord as well with the believers in the fellowship of His blood and body.

The bread and the cup are the constituents of the Lord?s supper, which is a table, a feast, set up by Him so that His believers may remember Him by enjoying Him as such a feast. Hence, to remember the Lord is not to lock oneself alone inside a room and think of Him, but it is to attend the Lord?s table and feast on the Lord together with the saints.

In the aspect of eating the Lord?s supper, the bread refers to the Lord?s physical, individual body, which He gave for us on the cross, whereas in the aspect of attending the Lord?s table, the bread points to the Lord?s corporate Body ? the church, which is constituted with all the regenerated believers brought forth through His resurrection from the dead. We are the bread, and this bread is the church. The former is physical and was put to death and given for us; the latter is mystical and is constituted with all the saints in the Lord?s resurrection. Therefore, each time that we break the bread, on the one hand, we remember the Lord and enjoy Him by receiving the body which He gave for us on the cross; on the other hand, we enjoy the mystical Body which He produced through His resurrection from the dead, fellowshipping with all the saints in this mystical Body and testifying of the oneness of this mystical Body. There is not only a relationship between us and the Lord, but a relationship between us and all the saints.

The bread, which we share and partake of together and which symbolizes the individual body of Christ, comes into us to make us all one Bread, signifying the one corporate, mystical Body of Christ (1 Cor. 10:17). The bread signifies the one Body of Christ. Although we are many, yet we are one Body because we all partake of the one bread. Our joint partaking of the one bread makes us all one. This indicates that our partaking together of Christ makes us all His one Body. The very Christ of whom we all partake constitutes us His one Body. Hence, each time we come to the Lord?s table to break the bread, we testify of the oneness of this mystical Body, that is, the universal church. Our participation in the Lord?s table during the bread-breaking meeting is a testimony of this unique fellowship of His unique Body, without any division either in practice or in spirit.

The Setting for the Bread-Breaking Meeting

The early believers continued steadfastly in the breaking of bread that they did it on a daily basis (Acts 2:46). At the time, because they were fervent toward the Lord and loved Him deeply, they spontaneously broke bread every day. Later on, they gradually acquired the habit of doing it once a week on the first day (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2). The first day of the week, which is the Lord?s Day, is the day of the Lord?s resurrection and the beginning of a new week, signifying that the old things are passed away and a new life has begun. Furthermore, although we display the Lord?s death when we break bread, we are actually remembering Him in resurrection. Therefore, it is most appropriate to break bread to remember the Lord on this day. This is affirmed by the ministry speaking:

    ?The early church broke bread from house to house every day. They probably remembered the Lord before every meal. At that time the believers were very zealous for the Lord. Our practice of having the bread-breaking meetings on the Lord?s Day is also according to the Bible. Even though Acts 2:46 speaks of the saints breaking bread every day in their homes, 20:7 shows that the saints came together to break the bread on the first day of the week. It gradually became a pattern in the early church life to hold the bread-breaking meeting on the first day of the week.? (W. Lee, Three Crucial Matters for the Increase and Building Up of the Church: Begetting, Nourishing, and Teaching, pp. 48-49, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

    ?The New Testament shows us that the early Christians met on the Lord?s Day. In Acts 20 Paul arrived at Troas and stayed there for seven days. On the Lord?s Day, the saints gathered together to break bread in remembrance of the Lord (v. 7). This indicates that at that time the Christians met on the Lord?s Day.? (W. Lee, The Present Advance of the Lord's Recovery, Chapter 3, Section 4, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

    ?If there are ten to twenty saints in a home meeting, we may sometimes bring them to attend the Lord?s table meeting at the meeting hall on the Lord?s Day morning. I believe this will be a great encouragement to them?. As long as the saints in the district fellowship and pray according to the real situation and need, the thirty to sixty people can meet together. After three to four weeks we can bring these brothers and sisters to the meeting hall to attend the Lord?s table meeting on the Lord?s Day.? (W. Lee, Bearing Remaining Fruit, Vol. 1, Chapter 13, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

As regards the venue of bread-breaking meeting, the early believers in Jerusalem broke bread from house to house (Acts 2:46):

    ?At Pentecost over three thousand people were saved. Day by day, they continued steadfastly with one accord in the temple and broke bread from house to house (Acts 2:46). Due to their great number, the believers met regularly from house to house. They met in the temple only when they all needed to gather together. Other than these times, the brothers and sisters assembled in different homes.? (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, (Set 3) Vol. 62: Matured Leadings in the Lord's Recovery (2), Chapter 10, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

The early believers also came together in one place for the bread-breaking meeting (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:20):

    ?The disciples had meetings in the homes of the people who believed in the Lord; they had home meetings. We believe that later some homes joined together to have a small group meeting and that the group meetings joined together to form a district meeting. Every city had home meetings, small group meetings, and district meetings. The people who were saved loved the Lord, and they gave everything that they had for Him. They were the Lord?s testimony. Furthermore, Acts shows us another meeting. In Acts 20:7 the whole church met together to break bread and to hear a word from the apostle Paul. Instead of going from house to house to speak a word of light, revelation, and vision, the apostle spoke in this gathering. This meeting is what we call a big meeting.? (W. Lee, Three Crucial Matters for the Increase and Building Up of the Church: Begetting, Nourishing, and Teaching, p. 152, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

    ?According to this word, the early believers also came together in one place to eat the Lord?s supper. This must have occurred in a larger place. There is the sweet and intimate flavor of a small meeting when we gather to break bread in the homes. There is also the rich and uplifted atmosphere of a large meeting when we gather together in one place. The believers may break bread in separate homes or in one place, and this should be decided on by the church according to the need and the situation.? (W. Lee, Life Lessons, Vol. 2, Chapter 17, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

    ?According to our present situation, we cannot have the bread-breaking meeting in every home even though the saints in the initial church life broke bread from house to house (Acts 2:46)?. Even though Acts 2:46 speaks of the saints breaking bread every day in their homes, 20:7 shows that the saints came together to break the bread on the first day of the week.? (W. Lee, Three Crucial Matters for the Increase and Building Up of the Church: Begetting, Nourishing, and Teaching, pp. 48-49, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

However, despite the clear record of the Scriptures and the mature leadings of Brother Lee concerning the bread-breaking meeting according to the Word and our present situation as cited above, a sister has propounded that the descriptive practice of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting seen in Acts 2:46 is the optimum means of hastening the Lord?s return and insisted that the churches promote and practice it or be censured. To be sure, the practice of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting in the Acts has its benefits. However, as we shall see, it is neither a truth nor a prescriptive practice that all the saints and churches must insist upon. The sister?s assertions were based on her allegations that house-to-house Lord?s table meeting was practiced and taught by the Lord Jesus, the early believers, Brother Nee and Brother Lee. Let us look into the Word and historical facts to examine one by one the truthfulness and verity of her claims.

The Example of the Lord Jesus on Bread-Breaking

First, the sister claimed that the Lord practiced the Lord?s table meeting of two or three believers by His ?breaking bread? with the two disciples on their way to Emmaus in Luke 24:13-35. But, as illustrated by our article ?Was Jesus? Breaking of Bread with the Two Disciples Going to Emmaus a Lord?s Table Meeting??, brothers Nee and Lee quoted the Lord?s breaking of bread with the two disciples in numerous occasions and applied them to many spiritual lessons but never to the Lord?s table meeting. Similarly, notable Bible scholars also did not interpret the Lord?s breaking of bread with the two disciples going to Emmaus as a Lord?s table meeting. Instead, they acknowledged that as a mere repast. As pointed out in our article ?What were the Practices of the Early Church Life in Acts 2??, the Greek word for ?breaking of bread? in Luke 24:30 and 35, as in Acts 2:46; 20:11, and 27:35, is klontes arton which generally refers to common meals that the believers partook of at home, and not the breaking of bread of the Lord?s table meeting. Hence, it is beyond any doubt that the sister is either inaccurate or altogether erroneous in citing the Lord Jesus as the first example of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting composed of a small number of believers.

Second, in instituting the first Lord?s table meeting and demonstrating to the disciples the way to do it, the Lord Jesus did not practice ?house-to-house Lord?s table meeting;? He did not go to the disciples separately from house to house to break bread with them. Rather, He called them all together in one place to display the oneness that was signified by the bread and the fellowship that was carried out through the breaking and the partaking of the bread by the members of the one Body.

Third, had the Lord preferred to use the house of the disciples, He could have easily done so by requesting any of the disciples to conveniently ?open? his house just for the Lord?s table meeting. Instead, He asked Peter and John to ?borrow? a furnished upper room in a certain one?s house (Matt. 26:18-19; Luke 22:8-13) for its use. This arrangement of the Lord is similar to today?s district Lord?s table meeting that brothers Nee and Lee had led the churches t0 practice rather than the house-to-house Lord?s table meeting that the sister is advocating today.

Applying the principle of first mention in the Bible, the first Lord?s table meeting instituted by the Lord was (1) not held with a small number of two or three disciples only, (2) not going from house to house but a gathering of a moderate number of saints together, and (3) not conveniently a Lord?s table meeting for household members only and a few serving ones. Noticeably, all these precedents set by the Lord Himself exude stark contrast to the kind of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting that the sister is promoting today. The charge to His disciples was to do it unto His remembrance without any bearing or emphasis on the venue.

The Example of the Early Believers on Bread-Breaking

The sister contended that house-to-house Lord?s table meeting should be practiced in the church life today simply because it is an example shown to us in Acts 2:46. But, as illustrated in our article ?What were the Practices of the Early Church Life in Acts 2??, the practice of daily house-to-house Lord?s table meeting we gleaned from the seminal church life in Acts was not meant for us to follow legalistically without consideration, due to the following reasons:

First, the daily house-to-house Lord?s table meeting we see in Acts 2:46 portrays the condition of the church in Jerusalem during the earliest church life immediately after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost that issued in the producing of the church, but it had not become a blueprint for other churches in succeeding days to follow altogether. In fact, apart from Acts 2:46, we do not see other biblical records of other churches doing such a practice. Conversely, instead of partaking of the Lord?s table every day like in the earliest church life depicted in Acts 2:46, not long thereafter the believers in Paul?s time partook of it once a week ? on the Lord?s Day, the first day of the week which is the day of resurrection (1 Cor. 11:20). Also, after chapter 2, the house-to-house breaking of bread was not mentioned again in Acts or in any of the Epistles. Instead, we see that the early believers came together in one place for the bread-breaking meeting (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:20). Today, should we insist on practicing the items which even the churches in the later part of Acts and the Epistles have modified and moved on from?

Second, in the early days, the church in Jerusalem had more than ten or twenty thousand members in a short period of time (Acts 21:20 fn1). Under God?s sovereignty and the Spirit?s leading, the believers met mostly from house to house or, simply, at home. Aside from preaching and teaching which were done in the temple (Acts 2:42, 46; 5:42), all other church activities were done in the believers? homes. They opened their homes to invite their neighbors, friends, and relatives to preach the gospel to them; they opened their homes for home meetings to cherish and nourish the new believers; they opened their homes for ?Bible-study? and to prophesy the teaching and fellowship they heard from the apostles; they opened their homes for prayer. In the same manner, they opened their homes for bread-breaking. Hence, breaking bread at home was very logical for them to do. Where else would the believers break bread as the believers? house is the believers? predominant meeting place?

Third, in the only biblically recorded practice of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting in Acts 2, three things were involved: every day (time), house to house (venue), and breaking of bread (food). According to Acts 2:46, the Lord?s table meeting was held every day, from house to house, and preceded by a meal. These three items describe the house-to-house Lord?s table meeting in Acts 2:46. To merely copy the ?house-to-house? aspect of the Lord?s table meeting in Acts 2:46, as the sister did, and forsake the other two concomitant aspects of practicing it every day and the partaking of food preceding it makes it partial, selective, and subjective. What can possibly be the basis of keeping the one aspect of the practice while omitting the other two?

Fourth, to say that we must copy the house-to-house Lord?s table meeting in Acts 2:46 simply because it is a beneficial contributing factor to the reviving and prevailing condition at the beginning of the church life in Jerusalem is insufficient. As illustrated in our article ?What were the Practices of the Early Church Life in Acts 2??, there were fifteen practices that the believers steadfastly and faithfully attended to in the early days of church history which are covered by Acts 2:42-47. These portray the state of the wonderful beginning and prevailing church life in Jerusalem. Each of them carries spiritual principles and lessons behind such a prevailing church life, full of revival and blessings. Breaking bread from house to house is just one of them. For the sister to insist on repeating the practices of the early believers at the beginning of the church life as shown to us in Acts 2:42-47 to the letter, should she not also practice the other items such as wonders and signs, meeting every day, having all things in common, and selling possessions and properties to share among all to be faithful to the early believers? example?
 

[a sister in Christ]

The bread-breaking meeting is the most important meeting of the church. It is a matter of utmost seriousness because it involves the one unique Body of Christ. It is the practical symbol of our oneness and, as such, deserves our greatest care and study.

The symbol of the oneness that we enjoy is seen in the bread at the Lord's table, which signifies not only the physical body of the Lord Jesus given in His death for our redemption, but also the mystical Body of Christ produced through His resurrection for His unique expression. When we partake of the bread at the Lord's table, we identify ourselves with the crucified and resurrected Lord and with His universal Body, and we declare to the entire universe that we stand as one, apart from all division. To partake of the bread is to touch the Lord's heart, for the bread and our joint participation in it touch the Lord's Body, for which He gave His life.

It is sad that in recent years, some among us have risen up to establish tables in reckless disregard of the feeling of the Body and opposed to the fellowship of the elders of the church. By misquoting the Bible and misrepresenting the ministry, some saints have been misled to think that such a practice is both scriptural and based on the ministry, as the proponents have repeatedly trumpeted. A number of churches and saints have voiced concern about this and seek to find clear fellowship about these matters, particularly the practice of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting. In this article of two parts, we shall present from the Word and the ministry what the proper bread-breaking and the meeting to break bread really are.

The Bread-Breaking Meeting Being Instituted by the Lord

On the night the Lord Jesus was betrayed, He had supper with His disciples. As they were eating, the Lord took the bread and blessed it. Having given thanks, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, saying, ?Take, eat. This is My body, which is given for you. Do this unto the remembrance of Me.? Similarly, after they had dined, He took the cup and gave thanks. Then He gave it to them and said, ?Drink of it, all of you. This cup is the new covenant established in My blood, which is being poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. Do this, as often as you drink it, unto the remembrance of Me? (Cf. Matt. 26:26-28; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-25).

The Lord Jesus instituted the bread-breaking meeting after He and His disciples had eaten the Passover (Matt. 26:20-25; Luke 22:14-18). He did that to replace the Feast of Passover because He was going to fulfill the type and be the real Passover to us (1 Cor. 5:7). Today, as we attend the bread-breaking meeting, we are keeping the real Feast of Unleavened Bread (Matt. 26:17; 1 Cor. 5:8), which was a seven-day feast (Lev. 23:6) also known as the Passover (Luke 22:1; Mark 14:1). The Feast of Passover was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Exo. 12:15-20; 13:6-7). Hence, we must come together on the Lord?s Day, the first day of the week, to the bread-breaking meeting, for it is a replacement and continuation of the Old Testament Feast of Passover. The New Testament feast of the Lord?s table will only be replaced and continued by the feast in the coming kingdom of God when the Savior will feast with the overcoming saints upon His return (Luke 22:30; 13:28-29).

In view of this, the Lord commanded the disciples to ?do this? to remember Him, instilling in them the importance He gave to their coming together to eat the bread and drink of the cup to remember Him until He comes back (1 Cor. 11:26). Israel?s keeping of the Passover to remember their deliverance from slavery in Egypt to have a new start typifies the believers? keeping of the Lord?s table to remember the Lord?s redemption and salvation (Matt. 26:26-28) while awaiting our full redemption upon His return. Moreover, as the Feast of Tabernacles was a remembrance to the Israelites of how God had provided their fathers with tents to live in during their wandering years in the wilderness (Lev. 23:39-43) while expecting to enter into the rest of the promised good land, the Lord?s table is also our remembrance of the Lord?s provisions and leading during our sojourning in the temporary dwelling place on this earth to enter into the New Jerusalem in the new heaven and new earth which is our eternal habitation (Rev. 21:3).

The bread-breaking meeting consists of the remembrance of the Lord in the first part and the worship of the Father in the second part. According to the procedure in God?s salvation, we first receive the Lord and then draw near to the Father. After we have partaken of the bread and the cup, we the many sons of God should be led by the Lord who is designated God?s Firstborn Son to worship the Father together in our spirit.

Eating the Lord?s Supper Mainly to Remember the Lord

The first aspect of the bread-breaking meeting is eating the Lord?s supper. It pertains to a relationship between us and the Lord and can be called the vertical aspect of the bread-breaking meeting. The emphasis of eating the Lord?s supper is the remembrance of the Lord (1 Cor. 11:20, 23-25). By eating the Lord?s bread and drinking of the Lord?s cup, we eat the Lord?s supper in remembrance of the Lord.

In the aspect of the Lord?s supper, the bread signifies the Lord?s individual physical body that He gave for us (1 Cor. 11:23). The bread also denotes life ? the eternal life of God (John 6:33-35, 48). Thus, the bread is a symbol signifying the Lord?s body, which was broken on the cross to release His life in order that we may participate in it. When we see or receive the bread, we remember how His body was given to us (1 Cor. 11:24) so that we may have His eternal life, and how His body was broken for us so that He could be distributed as bread to us.

The cup signifies the new covenant that the Lord enacted for us by shedding His blood (1 Cor. 11:25). Whenever we see or receive this cup, we should consider how the Lord partook of flesh and blood for us (Heb. 2:14), how He gave His body for us that we may have His life, and how He shed His blood for us that we may be redeemed from our fallen condition back to God and to God?s full blessing. By this symbol, we should consider how the Lord bore our sins, was made sin for us, and was judged and cursed for us, shedding His blood, which constitutes our cup of blessing, our eternal blessed portion. We should also consider how we are redeemed, forgiven, sanctified, justified, reconciled, and accepted by God through the Lord?s blood, how it cleanses us from our sins and washes our conscience that we may come to God with boldness, how it speaks better things before God, and how it resists the attacks from the evil spirits for us that we may overcome the devil who accuses us.

While the bread on the table is identified as the bread, the blood on the table is not identified as the blood, but as the cup. If the cup was referred to as the blood, it would denote only redemption. However, the significance of the cup encompasses much more than merely redemption. In the Bible the cup signifies a portion, a blessing (1 Cor. 10:16), which is God Himself as the believers? portion (Psa. 16:5) which we obtain from God. Formerly in Adam we were sinful and evil, and the portion that we deserved from God is the cup of God?s wrath (Rev. 14:10; 21:8). However, the Lord drank this cup for us on the cross (John 18:11). He shed His blood to fully redeem us from our sins. Hence, His salvation became our portion (Lam. 3:24; Col. 1:12), which is the cup of salvation (Psa. 116:13), and our cup of blessing that runs over (Psa. 23:5). Its content is God Himself as our all-inclusive blessing. Thus, by drinking of the cup, we remember how the Lord poured out His blood to redeem us that our sins may be forgiven (Matt. 26:28) and that we may experience God Himself and all that He has as our eternal blessed portion.

The Lord knows how easily we forget Him. Although the grace we received is so great and the redemption we obtained so wonderful, we would often still forget Him. For this reason He charged us to remember Him. By eating the bread and drinking the cup, we take in the redeeming Lord as our portion and as our life and blessing. This is to remember the Lord in a genuine way.

Eating the Lord?s Supper Also to Display His Death

Whenever we eat the Lord?s bread and drink of His cup, we simultaneously remember the Lord and display His death (1 Cor. 11:26). Originally, the blood was in the flesh. When the blood is separated from the flesh, it means death has occurred. The bread refers to the Lord?s body, and the cup, to His blood. The bread and the cup, displayed separately on the table, signify death. Since the separation of the body and the blood signifies death, death is thus displayed. While we are remembering the Lord, we display the Lord?s death for ourselves and for others to see, including the angels.

With the display of Christ?s death, we display and announce Christ?s all-inclusive termination of twelve items on the cross: the angelic life (Col. 1:20), the fallen human life (Gal. 2:20), Satan (Heb. 2:14; John 12:31), the kingdom of Satan (Col. 2:15; John 12:31), sin (2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 8:3), sins (1 Pet. 2:24; Isa. 53:6), the world (Gal. 6:14; John 12:31), death (Heb. 2:14), flesh (Gal. 5:24), the old man (Rom. 6:6), self (Gal. 2:20), and all things or creation (Col. 1:20). By the death of the Lord, all negative things have come to an end, and their end is displayed openly.

We should take the Lord?s supper unto the remembrance of Him by declaring His redeeming death continually until He comes back to set up God?s kingdom (Matt. 26:29). In His first coming, the Lord accomplished His death to carry out an all-inclusive redemption for the producing of the church. After His death, He went away to receive the kingdom, and will come again with the kingdom (Dan. 7:13-14; Luke 19:12). The period between His first and second comings is the church age. The church, thus, bridges the gap between the Lord?s two comings and connects His death in the past with God?s kingdom in the future. Hence, to declare the Lord?s death until He comes implies the declaring of the existence of the church for the bringing in of the kingdom.

When we eat the Lord?s supper with a view of continually remembering Him in His first and second comings, and in a spirit and atmosphere of hoping and waiting for His return, that supper becomes a real satisfaction to Him in relation to the kingdom, God?s administration.

Attending the Lord?s Table to Fellowship with the Saints

The second aspect of the bread-breaking meeting is attending the Lord?s table. It conveys a relationship between us and the saints and can be called the horizontal aspect of the bread-breaking meeting. While eating the Lord?s supper is for us to remember the Lord, attending the Lord?s table is for all the members of the Body of Christ to fellowship in the Lord (1 Cor. 10:16-17) in His accomplishments for us, the stress of which is on the fellowship among the saints. Its emphasis is not just the individual drinking of the blood of Christ but a joint participation in His blood. This joint participation is the fellowship.

Our eating and partaking of one bread and drinking and sharing of one cup imply mutual fellowship. Such fellowship becomes the fellowship of the blood of Christ and the fellowship of the Body of Christ. When we eat and drink together, sharing in the Lord?s bread and the Lord?s cup, we ?partake of the table of the Lord? (1 Cor. 10:21). That is why we must partake of the Lord?s table together with other saints; otherwise, we would only have the vertical aspect of the bread-breaking meeting.

At this table, we share in the Lord?s body and the Lord?s blood with all the saints and have fellowship with one another. Fellowship refers to the believers? communion in the joint participation in the blood and body of Christ. This fellowship makes us, the participants in the Lord?s blood and body, one with the Lord and one with one another. We, the participants, make ourselves identified with the Lord as well with the believers in the fellowship of His blood and body.

The bread and the cup are the constituents of the Lord?s supper, which is a table, a feast, set up by Him so that His believers may remember Him by enjoying Him as such a feast. Hence, to remember the Lord is not to lock oneself alone inside a room and think of Him, but it is to attend the Lord?s table and feast on the Lord together with the saints.

In the aspect of eating the Lord?s supper, the bread refers to the Lord?s physical, individual body, which He gave for us on the cross, whereas in the aspect of attending the Lord?s table, the bread points to the Lord?s corporate Body ? the church, which is constituted with all the regenerated believers brought forth through His resurrection from the dead. We are the bread, and this bread is the church. The former is physical and was put to death and given for us; the latter is mystical and is constituted with all the saints in the Lord?s resurrection. Therefore, each time that we break the bread, on the one hand, we remember the Lord and enjoy Him by receiving the body which He gave for us on the cross; on the other hand, we enjoy the mystical Body which He produced through His resurrection from the dead, fellowshipping with all the saints in this mystical Body and testifying of the oneness of this mystical Body. There is not only a relationship between us and the Lord, but a relationship between us and all the saints.

The bread, which we share and partake of together and which symbolizes the individual body of Christ, comes into us to make us all one Bread, signifying the one corporate, mystical Body of Christ (1 Cor. 10:17). The bread signifies the one Body of Christ. Although we are many, yet we are one Body because we all partake of the one bread. Our joint partaking of the one bread makes us all one. This indicates that our partaking together of Christ makes us all His one Body. The very Christ of whom we all partake constitutes us His one Body. Hence, each time we come to the Lord?s table to break the bread, we testify of the oneness of this mystical Body, that is, the universal church. Our participation in the Lord?s table during the bread-breaking meeting is a testimony of this unique fellowship of His unique Body, without any division either in practice or in spirit.

The Setting for the Bread-Breaking Meeting

The early believers continued steadfastly in the breaking of bread that they did it on a daily basis (Acts 2:46). At the time, because they were fervent toward the Lord and loved Him deeply, they spontaneously broke bread every day. Later on, they gradually acquired the habit of doing it once a week on the first day (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2). The first day of the week, which is the Lord?s Day, is the day of the Lord?s resurrection and the beginning of a new week, signifying that the old things are passed away and a new life has begun. Furthermore, although we display the Lord?s death when we break bread, we are actually remembering Him in resurrection. Therefore, it is most appropriate to break bread to remember the Lord on this day. This is affirmed by the ministry speaking:

    ?The early church broke bread from house to house every day. They probably remembered the Lord before every meal. At that time the believers were very zealous for the Lord. Our practice of having the bread-breaking meetings on the Lord?s Day is also according to the Bible. Even though Acts 2:46 speaks of the saints breaking bread every day in their homes, 20:7 shows that the saints came together to break the bread on the first day of the week. It gradually became a pattern in the early church life to hold the bread-breaking meeting on the first day of the week.? (W. Lee, Three Crucial Matters for the Increase and Building Up of the Church: Begetting, Nourishing, and Teaching, pp. 48-49, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

    ?The New Testament shows us that the early Christians met on the Lord?s Day. In Acts 20 Paul arrived at Troas and stayed there for seven days. On the Lord?s Day, the saints gathered together to break bread in remembrance of the Lord (v. 7). This indicates that at that time the Christians met on the Lord?s Day.? (W. Lee, The Present Advance of the Lord's Recovery, Chapter 3, Section 4, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

    ?If there are ten to twenty saints in a home meeting, we may sometimes bring them to attend the Lord?s table meeting at the meeting hall on the Lord?s Day morning. I believe this will be a great encouragement to them?. As long as the saints in the district fellowship and pray according to the real situation and need, the thirty to sixty people can meet together. After three to four weeks we can bring these brothers and sisters to the meeting hall to attend the Lord?s table meeting on the Lord?s Day.? (W. Lee, Bearing Remaining Fruit, Vol. 1, Chapter 13, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

As regards the venue of bread-breaking meeting, the early believers in Jerusalem broke bread from house to house (Acts 2:46):

    ?At Pentecost over three thousand people were saved. Day by day, they continued steadfastly with one accord in the temple and broke bread from house to house (Acts 2:46). Due to their great number, the believers met regularly from house to house. They met in the temple only when they all needed to gather together. Other than these times, the brothers and sisters assembled in different homes.? (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, (Set 3) Vol. 62: Matured Leadings in the Lord's Recovery (2), Chapter 10, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

The early believers also came together in one place for the bread-breaking meeting (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:20):

    ?The disciples had meetings in the homes of the people who believed in the Lord; they had home meetings. We believe that later some homes joined together to have a small group meeting and that the group meetings joined together to form a district meeting. Every city had home meetings, small group meetings, and district meetings. The people who were saved loved the Lord, and they gave everything that they had for Him. They were the Lord?s testimony. Furthermore, Acts shows us another meeting. In Acts 20:7 the whole church met together to break bread and to hear a word from the apostle Paul. Instead of going from house to house to speak a word of light, revelation, and vision, the apostle spoke in this gathering. This meeting is what we call a big meeting.? (W. Lee, Three Crucial Matters for the Increase and Building Up of the Church: Begetting, Nourishing, and Teaching, p. 152, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

    ?According to this word, the early believers also came together in one place to eat the Lord?s supper. This must have occurred in a larger place. There is the sweet and intimate flavor of a small meeting when we gather to break bread in the homes. There is also the rich and uplifted atmosphere of a large meeting when we gather together in one place. The believers may break bread in separate homes or in one place, and this should be decided on by the church according to the need and the situation.? (W. Lee, Life Lessons, Vol. 2, Chapter 17, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

    ?According to our present situation, we cannot have the bread-breaking meeting in every home even though the saints in the initial church life broke bread from house to house (Acts 2:46)?. Even though Acts 2:46 speaks of the saints breaking bread every day in their homes, 20:7 shows that the saints came together to break the bread on the first day of the week.? (W. Lee, Three Crucial Matters for the Increase and Building Up of the Church: Begetting, Nourishing, and Teaching, pp. 48-49, LSM) [Emphasis Added]

However, despite the clear record of the Scriptures and the mature leadings of Brother Lee concerning the bread-breaking meeting according to the Word and our present situation as cited above, a sister has propounded that the descriptive practice of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting seen in Acts 2:46 is the optimum means of hastening the Lord?s return and insisted that the churches promote and practice it or be censured. To be sure, the practice of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting in the Acts has its benefits. However, as we shall see, it is neither a truth nor a prescriptive practice that all the saints and churches must insist upon. The sister?s assertions were based on her allegations that house-to-house Lord?s table meeting was practiced and taught by the Lord Jesus, the early believers, Brother Nee and Brother Lee. Let us look into the Word and historical facts to examine one by one the truthfulness and verity of her claims.

The Example of the Lord Jesus on Bread-Breaking

First, the sister claimed that the Lord practiced the Lord?s table meeting of two or three believers by His ?breaking bread? with the two disciples on their way to Emmaus in Luke 24:13-35. But, as illustrated by our article ?Was Jesus? Breaking of Bread with the Two Disciples Going to Emmaus a Lord?s Table Meeting??, brothers Nee and Lee quoted the Lord?s breaking of bread with the two disciples in numerous occasions and applied them to many spiritual lessons but never to the Lord?s table meeting. Similarly, notable Bible scholars also did not interpret the Lord?s breaking of bread with the two disciples going to Emmaus as a Lord?s table meeting. Instead, they acknowledged that as a mere repast. As pointed out in our article ?What were the Practices of the Early Church Life in Acts 2??, the Greek word for ?breaking of bread? in Luke 24:30 and 35, as in Acts 2:46; 20:11, and 27:35, is klontes arton which generally refers to common meals that the believers partook of at home, and not the breaking of bread of the Lord?s table meeting. Hence, it is beyond any doubt that the sister is either inaccurate or altogether erroneous in citing the Lord Jesus as the first example of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting composed of a small number of believers.

Second, in instituting the first Lord?s table meeting and demonstrating to the disciples the way to do it, the Lord Jesus did not practice ?house-to-house Lord?s table meeting;? He did not go to the disciples separately from house to house to break bread with them. Rather, He called them all together in one place to display the oneness that was signified by the bread and the fellowship that was carried out through the breaking and the partaking of the bread by the members of the one Body.

Third, had the Lord preferred to use the house of the disciples, He could have easily done so by requesting any of the disciples to conveniently ?open? his house just for the Lord?s table meeting. Instead, He asked Peter and John to ?borrow? a furnished upper room in a certain one?s house (Matt. 26:18-19; Luke 22:8-13) for its use. This arrangement of the Lord is similar to today?s district Lord?s table meeting that brothers Nee and Lee had led the churches t0 practice rather than the house-to-house Lord?s table meeting that the sister is advocating today.

Applying the principle of first mention in the Bible, the first Lord?s table meeting instituted by the Lord was (1) not held with a small number of two or three disciples only, (2) not going from house to house but a gathering of a moderate number of saints together, and (3) not conveniently a Lord?s table meeting for household members only and a few serving ones. Noticeably, all these precedents set by the Lord Himself exude stark contrast to the kind of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting that the sister is promoting today. The charge to His disciples was to do it unto His remembrance without any bearing or emphasis on the venue.

The Example of the Early Believers on Bread-Breaking

The sister contended that house-to-house Lord?s table meeting should be practiced in the church life today simply because it is an example shown to us in Acts 2:46. But, as illustrated in our article ?What were the Practices of the Early Church Life in Acts 2??, the practice of daily house-to-house Lord?s table meeting we gleaned from the seminal church life in Acts was not meant for us to follow legalistically without consideration, due to the following reasons:

First, the daily house-to-house Lord?s table meeting we see in Acts 2:46 portrays the condition of the church in Jerusalem during the earliest church life immediately after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost that issued in the producing of the church, but it had not become a blueprint for other churches in succeeding days to follow altogether. In fact, apart from Acts 2:46, we do not see other biblical records of other churches doing such a practice. Conversely, instead of partaking of the Lord?s table every day like in the earliest church life depicted in Acts 2:46, not long thereafter the believers in Paul?s time partook of it once a week ? on the Lord?s Day, the first day of the week which is the day of resurrection (1 Cor. 11:20). Also, after chapter 2, the house-to-house breaking of bread was not mentioned again in Acts or in any of the Epistles. Instead, we see that the early believers came together in one place for the bread-breaking meeting (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:20). Today, should we insist on practicing the items which even the churches in the later part of Acts and the Epistles have modified and moved on from?

Second, in the early days, the church in Jerusalem had more than ten or twenty thousand members in a short period of time (Acts 21:20 fn1). Under God?s sovereignty and the Spirit?s leading, the believers met mostly from house to house or, simply, at home. Aside from preaching and teaching which were done in the temple (Acts 2:42, 46; 5:42), all other church activities were done in the believers? homes. They opened their homes to invite their neighbors, friends, and relatives to preach the gospel to them; they opened their homes for home meetings to cherish and nourish the new believers; they opened their homes for ?Bible-study? and to prophesy the teaching and fellowship they heard from the apostles; they opened their homes for prayer. In the same manner, they opened their homes for bread-breaking. Hence, breaking bread at home was very logical for them to do. Where else would the believers break bread as the believers? house is the believers? predominant meeting place?

Third, in the only biblically recorded practice of house-to-house Lord?s table meeting in Acts 2, three things were involved: every day (time), house to house (venue), and breaking of bread (food). According to Acts 2:46, the Lord?s table meeting was held every day, from house to house, and preceded by a meal. These three items describe the house-to-house Lord?s table meeting in Acts 2:46. To merely copy the ?house-to-house? aspect of the Lord?s table meeting in Acts 2:46, as the sister did, and forsake the other two concomitant aspects of practicing it every day and the partaking of food preceding it makes it partial, selective, and subjective. What can possibly be the basis of keeping the one aspect of the practice while omitting the other two?

Fourth, to say that we must copy the house-to-house Lord?s table meeting in Acts 2:46 simply because it is a beneficial contributing factor to the reviving and prevailing condition at the beginning of the church life in Jerusalem is insufficient. As illustrated in our article ?What were the Practices of the Early Church Life in Acts 2??, there were fifteen practices that the believers steadfastly and faithfully attended to in the early days of church history which are covered by Acts 2:42-47. These portray the state of the wonderful beginning and prevailing church life in Jerusalem. Each of them carries spiritual principles and lessons behind such a prevailing church life, full of revival and blessings. Breaking bread from house to house is just one of them. For the sister to insist on repeating the practices of the early believers at the beginning of the church life as shown to us in Acts 2:42-47 to the letter, should she not also practice the other items such as wonders and signs, meeting every day, having all things in common, and selling possessions and properties to share among all to be faithful to the early believers? example?