The Lord’s Supper (Hebrews 9:1-28)

Marc Minter

FBC Diana

Baptist Distinctives • Sermon • Submitted 2 months ago • Presented 2 months ago

0 ratings

· 21 views

Main idea: The Lord’s Supper is the ongoing sign of the New Covenant, a memorial of Christ’s sacrifice for those He came to save and an anticipation of Christ’s return.

Notes

Transcript

Introduction

One of the very earliest, maybe the first Baptist confession of faith was written in 1609 by a man named John Smyth and signed by a congregation of Baptists in London. That confession has a very short article on the Lord’s Supper.[i]It says, “We believe with the heart, and with the mouth confess… that the Lord’s Supper is the external sign of the communion of Christ, and [communion of] the faithful amongst themselves by faith and love.”[ii] There is no description of the meaning of the Supper, no mention of the elements, and a complete absence of any hint that there was a debate among Protestants about how exactly Christ may or may notbe present in a special way during the observance of the Supper.

Not quite 40 years later, seven Baptist churches in London quietlypublished another confession of faith (I say “quietly,” because there was no religious tolerance in England at that time, and being a Baptist in public could be dangerous for your health). The famous John Bunyan (author of The Pilgrim’s Progress) was converted around 1650, and he was arrested for illegal preaching in 1660 (only ministers approved by the Church of England were allowed to preach, and Bunyan was a non-conformist Baptist). He basically spent the next 12 years voluntarily imprisoned. At any point, he could have promised not to preach and not to join with Baptists in the Lord’s Supper, but he kept telling the magistrate that he would absolutely continue doing such things if he were set loose from his prison cell.

At any rate, what became known as the London Baptist Confession of 1644 is a much longer and more detailed confession than the one from 1609, but the 1644 Confession only briefly mentions “communion” as well. It seems that all Protestants (at least those in England and Scotland) basically agreed about what the Supper is and how it should be observed. So, there was simply no need to say much about it.

And that’s still pretty much true today (so far as I can tell)… though there are some minor differences among churches, regarding frequency and logistics. Protestants heartily disagreewith Roman Catholics about the Lord’s Supper (which I will talk more about in just a bit), but Protestants (Baptists and Presbyterians, Anglicans and Methodists)… they don’t disagree much at all with each other about the meaning of it.

And yet, the observance of the Lord’s Supper has indeeddivided Baptists from their various Protestant brethren… not because of what we believe about the Supper, so much as what we believe about baptism. Today, I’m going to describe a lot of the biblical perspective we share in common with other Protestants, and I’m going to briefly touch on that specific place where Baptists distinguish themselves.

We’re continuing our topical series for this year on Baptist Distinctives, and today we are going to focus heavily on the meaningand subjects (the what and the who) of the Lord’s Supper. As always, I want to strongly encourage further conversation with me, with our other pastors, and/or with other church members. When questions arise, the best practice is to ask them and to try to gain clarity on what we believe and why.

I hope it will be obvious, however, that my main goal today is that we will all be able to enjoy focusing our attention on the gospel of Christ, especially His death and resurrection and His glorious return, which is the substance to which the Lord’s Supper points.

Let’s stand together as I read our main passage aloud. Hebrews 9:1-28.

Scripture Reading

Hebrews 9:1–28 (ESV)

1 Now even the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly place of holiness. 2 For a tent was prepared, the first section, in which were the lampstand and the table and the bread of the Presence. It is called the Holy Place.

3 Behind the second curtain was a second section called the Most Holy Place, 4 having the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s staff that budded, and the tablets of the covenant.

5 Above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat. Of these things we cannot now speak in detail.

6 These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties, 7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people.

8 By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing 9 (which is symbolic for the present age). According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, 10 but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.

11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.

13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.

18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

Main Idea:

The Lord’s Supper is the ongoing sign of the New Covenant, a memorial of Christ’s sacrifice for those He came to save and an anticipation of Christ’s return.

Sermon

1. Sign, Not Sacrifice

Throughout this letter to the Hebrews, the author is making the case that Jewish or Hebrew Christians should not turn back to the Mosaic covenant, but rather that they should completely abandon the shadows of the Old Testament and grab hold of the substance of the New Testament or New Covenant. Here in our main passage for today, we see that contrast on full display… the contrast of the shadow(OT priests going into an OT temple to make OT sacrifices of various animals on an OT altar)… this is all contrasted with the substance of Jesus Christ (the perfect Priest of the New Covenant, who went into the heavenly temple to make a once-and-for-all effective sacrifice of Himself on the heavenly altar).

The whole point of this passage is to say that Jesus is the effectiveHigh Priest (the “mediator of a new covenant” [v15]), and all who look to Him should rest assured that Jesus has “put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (v26). And, while this passage doesn’t speak to the Lord’s Supper, I am drawing out the implication that Christians are to observe the Lord’s Supper as a memorial… a commemoration… a reminder… a celebration… of this glorious reality.

Now let me begin to define and clarify what we (Protestants) believe by way of a similar contrast. I am not going to pick on Roman Catholics out of spite, but I think it’s important that we understand where our differences are… because I believe those differences really matter.

As Baptists, we join with all our Protestant brethren in rejecting some of the central doctrinal claims of the Roman Catholic Church. And with our Protestant brethren, we affirm what we all believe to be the truly biblical and faithfully historical doctrines of Christianity, which are especially focused on the gospel (What did Christ do? And how are sinners saved?) and the Bible (By what standard do we judge what is true and false, right and wrong?).

One of the main places where Evangelical Protestants (including Baptists) disagree with Rome is on the doctrine of the sacraments generally, and especially on the sacrament which Rome calls the Eucharist. The word Eucharist comes from a Greek word that simply means “thanksgiving.” But the teaching of Rome around this word says quite a bit more than that.

In the standard-setting book which outlines and describesRoman Catholic teaching (Catechism of the Catholic Church, published in 1995),[iii] Rome says, “At the heart of the Eucharistic celebration are the bread and wine that… become Christ’s Body and Blood.”[iv] This is a very short way of saying that the elements of the bread and the wine actually transform in substance into the literal body and blood of Christ. Their form does not change, however; they remain bread and wine by all tangible measurements. But this real transformation of substance (or transubstantiation) is key to the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist.[v]

From my perspective the idea that the bread and wine transform into the body and blood of Christ is just a superstition from the Medieval period that Rome can’t ever leave behind. It’s not this idea in itself that is so repulsive (at least, not to me) – The body and blood of Christ is what elements signify! – but it’s the teaching that has grown up around the concept of transubstantiation that is a soul-destroying and Christ-denying heresy… And Rome’s teaching now requires that there be some sense in which the elements of the Eucharist are indeed transformed.

Rome teaches (again quoting from their definitive book), “The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice… the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and offered in an unbloody manner” in the Eucharist of the Mass.[vi] Thus, Rome says, “this sacrifice (i.e., the Eucharist) is truly propitiatory.”[vii]

In other words, the body and blood of Christ are set again upon an altar (albeit a pretty one with no real blood in sight, completely unlike the cross of Calvary), and the participants in the Eucharist are “offering” the “sacrifice” of Christ (yet again) in order to quench God’s burning judgment against them.

Friends, this is the exact opposite of what the Bible teaches. Look with me at v11-12 of our main passage. There we see that “Christ” has already “appeared as a high priest” who is “greater” than all the priests who came before Him (v11). We see, in v12, that Jesus “entered once for allinto the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood,” and that this offering of His own “blood” or life was the means by which He “secured an eternal redemption” for all those who would turn from their sin and trust in Him(v12).

If you ask me, “How does the Bible say that sinners are redeemed or saved or forgiven in God’s sight?”, then I answer, “Sinners are saved not by the repeated sacrifices of religious ritual, but by the once for all sacrifice of Jesus Christ… Jesus is the High Priest who secured redemption or salvation or forgiveness for sinners by the means of His own death in the place of the guilty.”

Look down to v24. There we read that “Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands… but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf” (v24). There we see an ongoing work of Christ’s priestly office; He is the continual advocate before the Father for all those who are His.

But look also at v25! We see that Christ does not “offer himself repeatedly,” like the priests of the Mosaic covenant had to continually offer sacrifices for sin (v25). And then near the end of v26 we read that Christ “has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (v26).

Brothers and sisters, when we gather to observe the Lord’s Supper, we are not offering a sacrifice… upon an altar… to a god who looks upon us with condemnation. No! We who observe the Supper (we who are repenting from sin and trusting in Christ… and joiningwith one another as we publicly reaffirm our hope and faith)… we gather around a table… to eat and drink a symbol or a sign of the feast of blessings… which our God has prepared for those who love Him.

We were indeed the enemies of God, but He has exhausted His wrath in full upon Christ… who has suffered in the place of those who love and trust Him. It was Christ who drank the bitter cup of God’s curse, so that those who repent and believe might enjoy a cup overflowing with God’s blessings.[viii]

Now, God Himself has made His enemies His friends, and He has set us a table (not an altar), so that we might enjoy this sign(not a sacrifice) of what God has already done in Christ (once and for all) to bring us near to Him.

2. Redemption, Not Judgment

The first contrast I’ve pointed out in our passage is that of Christ’s priestly effectiveness. He is the perfect High Priest, and He’s already offered Himself as the sufficient sacrifice to forgive sin and to save sinners.

The next contrast I’d like to show is that of Christ’s workor purpose in His first and second coming. Look down to v27-28 with me. The Scripture says that “it is appointed for man [i.e., mankind, humans, all people] to die once, and after that comes judgment” (v27). We will get to this more in a bit, but the fact is that all of us are going to die (sooner or later), and at the end of time we will all(dead or alive) stand before God… Some will receive complete salvation, and others will face God’s final and unalterable and eternal judgment.

Friend, I wonder how seriously you think of that day. Don’t you know that it’s coming? Don’t you know that none will escape it? How are you preparing yourself to endure that dreadful day when all your sin and all your secrets will be laid bare under the fiery and determined gaze of God’s judgment?

For those who turn from sin and trust in Christ, for those who are clinging to and following Jesus, there is great hope and even eager anticipation… see v28. “Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him” (v28).

I want to focus for a moment on an implication of that phrase “not to deal with sin” (v28). And here (I think) the NIV and the NET both get it better than the ESV. These both say, “not to bear sin but to bring salvation” (v28; NIV and NET).

The implication is that when Jesus came the first time, it was precisely to “deal with sin” or to “bear sin” (v28). The fancy word that shows up a couple of times in our passage for this is “redeem” (v15) or “redemption” (v14).

The Bible teaches us that Christ came the first time to be the sin-bearer on behalf of those He came to save. It was a scandal to first-century Jews and a ridiculous joke to first-century Greeks, but the sinless Son of God came to His own creation in the humble form of a man… and the God-man submitted Himself to the most humiliating judgment possible… “CURSED BY GOD!”

“Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree!” says the Old Testament law (Gal. 3:13; cf. Deut. 21:23). “[This man] has uttered blasphemy,” said the Jewish leaders (Matt. 26:65). “Let him be crucified!” shouted the mob outside of Pilate’s court (Matt. 27:23). “He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he desires him,” said the crowd who looked upon Jesus in His death (Matt. 27:43).

But God the Father did not speak up in Christ’s defense. No, God Himself spoke the most damning word of judgment… against His own Son at the cross. How can I describe this terrible yet wonderfulmoment? What words can I use to explain this incomprehensible yet plainly obvious case?

To whom did Christ offer this sacrifice of His “own blood” (v12)? What does it mean that Christ “entered once for all into the holy places” to make this sacrifice (v12)? Doesn’t the Scripture say what we shudder to hear?! Look there in v14! Jesus “offered himself without blemish to God” (v14)!

About 700 years before God the Son took on human form, the prophet Isaiah spoke of a suffering “servant” who would come. Isaiah said, “we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted… the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all” (Is. 53:4, 6). And “although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth. Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; hehas put him to grief” (Is. 53:9-10).

Friends, God’s righteousness demands justice. And every time we’ve done something God forbids… and every time we’ve not done something God commands… we’ve sinned… we’ve added yet another crime to our rap-sheet… we’ve increased the river of God’s wrath that will be set loose upon sinners on the last day… and we will all most certainly be overwhelmed by that flood!

Unless there is one who has absorbed that flood in full in our place…

This is how the prophet Isaiah said it in chapter 53: “because [the suffering servant] poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet [the sin he bore was not his own;] he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors” (Is. 53:12).

Coming back to our main text now, the end of v14 says that because “Christ… offered himself without blemish to God… [v15] he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant” (v14-15).

In other words, brothers and sisters, when we approach the Lord’s table (if we are turning from sin and trusting in Christ, who suffered God’s judgment in our place), we are welcomed by the God who has given His own Son in order to redeem us… we have no judgment to fear from Him at all. We are participants in the New Covenant, and we are encouragedto partake of this sign or symbol of it.

3. Baptized Believers, Not Just Anyone

So far, we’ve seen the contrast of shadow and substance (Christ is the substance of all the shadows in the OT; therefore, the Supper is a sign of Christ’s finished sacrifice and not a new or repeated sacrifice). We’ve also seen the contrast between redemption and judgment (because Christ bore God’s judgment on behalf of sinners already, we who repent and believe have been redeemed, and we have no judgment to fear from God at all).

Now we want to look carefully at the contrast between those who are welcome at Christ’s table and those who are not. I think (at least for some of us) it will be hard to think in terms of anyone being unwelcomeat the Lord’s Supper, but this is a reality we must consider. In fact, it is this practice of excluding some from the Lord’s table that helps us all better understand what we should expect on the last day. How do we know any of us will be welcome at Christ’s table in glory? Are we just wishful thinking? Are we presuming upon God’s grace? Are we lying in Christ’s name (God forbid!) by welcoming some to the table that are likely to be disappointed on that final day to learn that Christ Himself bars them from it?

Notice how our passage uses words like “our” and “those” and “them” throughout. When the author of Hebrews names what Christ has done or what He is doing, he is explicit about the fact that Christ bore the sins of “many” (v28), not all. The Scripture is clear that Christ is the mediator of a “new covenant,” but only “those who are called” will “receive the promised [or “covenanted”] eternal inheritance” (v15). And our passage says that Christ is now “in the presence of God on… behalf” of those “who are eagerly waiting for” his second coming (v24, 28)… in other words, Christ is not interceding for all people everywhere.

This passage of Hebrews is entirely focused on what Jesus did for guilty sinners, and though it is clear that only some sinners will benefit from what Christ has done, the passage does not address the matter of what distinguishes the one group from the other… those who be “saved” when Christ returns and those who will be judged and lost forever (v27-28).

To understand what the Bible says about that, we need to look at other passages. But, friends, I sometimes hear people talk like universalists even though I’m sure they are not. Nevertheless, people will sometimes act like the reality that Jesus died for sinners means that everyone is forgiven. People will sometimes act like the only thing that might keep a person from heaven is an overt rejection of the gospel, a public denial of Christ, or an open hostility toward Christianity.

Don’t you know that we all come into this world under God’s condemnation? Jesus said, “whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already” (Jn. 3:18). The Scripture says elsewhere, “Do you suppose… you who judge those who practice [sin] and yet do them yourself… that you will escape the judgment of God?” (Rom. 2:3).

The summary diagnosis of humanity in Scripture is that “none is righteous, no not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God… no one does good, not even one” (Rom. 3:10-12). And the label or title or status the Bible assigns naturally to us is “children of wrath,” who are by nature “dead in the trespasses and sins” in which we so instinctively “walk” or “live” (Eph. 2:1-3).

Just because Jesus came to die for sinners does not mean that you or I are necessarily a beneficiary of His unimaginably gracious work! The gospel has been lived out in the person and work of Christ, and it has been proclaimed far and wide in the world… And the response that the Bible demands from sinners like us is repentance and faith. We must hear the gospel, we must believe that Jesus is the Savior, we must turn from our sin, and we must throw in our whole lot with Him!

The Scripture says that “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Rom. 10:13). And when the gospel was preached on the day of Pentecost, and some responded, “What shall we do?” (Acts. 2:37), the Apostle Peter said, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38).

Now, there’s more here than I can unpack briefly, but we’ve talked many times about the various features of Christian conversion. When a sinner hears the gospel and believes it, when he or she turns away from an old life of sin and death and turns toward a new life of faith and holiness, we call that conversion.

And in the Bible, Christian conversion always includes several features:

1) receiving or being baptized by or filled by the Holy Spirit (i.e., regeneration or being born again)

2) repentance (i.e., turning away from sin)

3) belief or faith in Christ (i.e., trusting not only the facts about Jesus, but trusting Jesus Himself as Savior)

4) and water baptism (publicly professing Christ as Lord and being publicly affirmed by existing Christians).

Each and all of these are how a person “goes public” as a new Christian. There are theological distinctions here (each of these can be distinguished from the others), but there is not any separation here in practice. In other words, God Himself may know that you are a genuine believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, without any public display… but the only way anyone else will know you are a Christian (a believer, a participant in the New Covenant) is if you are showing evidence of spiritual life and love for Christ on the outside.

Here it is so vitally important to clarify that the evidence of Christian conversion is not to be confused with the means by which anyone is saved. We believe that sinners are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone… and our only hope in life and death is that Christ is an effective Savior… not that we have lived well enough to deserve it.

So, we aren’t talking about deserving a seat at Christ’s table. We aren’t talking about what you or I must do in order to make ourselves welcome to partake of the Lord’s Supper. What we’re talking about here is the way Christ Himself has authorized Christians to observe the Supper.

Christ Himself has designed it so that all those we invite to partake of the Supper today are those we believe (so far as we can tell) will be welcome at the Lord’s table in glory… And this requires evidence. God can see the heart of every person, but none of us can. So, Christ has told us how we are to approach this ongoing sign of the New Covenant. We are to be numbered among the visible body of Christ – specifically by baptism, which is directly related to church membership – and only then to approach as one who is welcome to partake.

This is the entire point of a passage we recently studied in 1 Corinthians. In ch. 11, the Apostle Paul says that even the ritual of eating and drinking in church is not the Lord’s Supper unless the congregation comes together with an awareness that they are all collectively members of Christ’s visible body (1 Cor. 11:17-34).

One of the main ways we teach this at FBC Diana is that we try to make it plain who is invited to partake. We say, “If you are a baptized member in good standing with this church or of another that teaches the same gospel, then you are welcome to participate.” But if you are not a believer or if you are not a baptized member of a gospel-believing church, then please let the plates pass you by.

One of the reasons we say this and practice it this way is because the Lord’s Supper is the ongoing sign of the New Covenant, and participation in it is a personal commitment (“I am trusting in Christ and accepted by God”) as well as a communal affirmation (“We are all trusting Christ and accepted by God together”).

The Lord’s Supper, then, is only for baptized believers, not for just anyone… and we should approach the Lord’s table with humility.

If you would like to talk more about this after the service today, then let’s do that. This matter is too important for us to simply agree to disagree… and it’s too important for any of us to proceed without careful thought and consideration.

4. Anticipation, Not Nihilism

The Lord’s Supper is a sign, not a sacrifice; a promise of redemption, not judgment; it is for baptized believers, and not just anyone who wants to participate; and finally (very briefly), the Supper is an anticipation, not an embrace of nihilism.

I thought of all sorts of words I might use to contrast anticipation in this last point, and all of them were just as likely to be strange to a lot of us. I thought of anticipation, not stoicism… anticipation, not anihilationism… anticipation, not escapism… but the point I’m aiming for here is the reality that the Lord’s Supper not only points back to something Christ has done to save sinners in the past, but it points forward to what Christ will do to save sinners in the future.

Did you notice how our passage spoke of “saving” or salvation in the future tense? Look down to those last two verses. The Scripture says, “And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him” (v27-28).

Nihilism is the idea that there is nothing after death, there is no inherent meaning for what happens now, and all we have is whatever we make of today. Though hardly anyone I know would claim to be a nihilist, I think many people live as through this is exactly what they believe. All moral lines are adjustable because morality is a social construct. I am not promised tomorrow, so let me get what I can today. God hasn’t thrown me in hell yet, so maybe He won’t ever do it. If this life is full of pain and sorrow, maybe death will be the end of it for me.

But the gospel of Christ (and the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper) speaks a different word. Christians commemorate or memorialize what Christ has done at the cross because the cross is directly connected to the resurrection. And the Bible teaches us that the same Jesus who rose from the grave on the third day will come again to raise all those who are repenting and believing ones… all those who are “eagerly waiting for him” (v28).

Brothers and sisters, when we observe the Lord’s Supper in just a bit, we are not only reaffirming our faith and trust in the Christ who died in our place… we are reaffirming and even reminding ourselves and one another that this same Jesus will one day return to bring the full completion of the salvation He has already won for us… and so we are eagerly waiting for Him.

Endnotes

[i] Anabaptists in Switzerland and Southern Germany had already been writing down their beliefs, but there is a genuine historical and theological distinction to be made between Anabaptists and Baptists. The short-lived unity and later divide between John Smyth and Thomas Helwys (both among that congregation in London in 1609) is a prime demonstration and example. [ii] John Albert Broadus, Baptist Confessions, Covenants, and Catechisms, ed. Timothy George and Denise George (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999). 33. [iii] Pope John Paul II said that this book is “A sure norm for teaching the Faith.” See the endorsements on the book cover. [iv] Catechism of the Catholic Church: With Modifications from the Editio Typica (New York: Doubleday, 1995). 371. [v] For a brief introduction to the doctrine of Transubstantiation, see this article here: https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/transubstantiation [vi] Catechism of the Catholic Church: With Modifications from the Editio Typica (New York: Doubleday, 1995). 381. [vii] Catechism of the Catholic Church: With Modifications from the Editio Typica (New York: Doubleday, 1995). 381. [viii] For the best description I’ve ever heard of this great exchange – Christ cursed so that sinners might be blessed – see this message delivered by R.C. Sproul in 2008. https://youtu.be/Lgwpd0SKpmc?si=giQelZG7gjiKwiXU

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aland, Kurt, Barbara Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M. Metzger, eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 28th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012.

Chrysostom, John. Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on the Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians. Edited by Philip Schaff. Logos Research Edition. Vol. 12. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, First Series. New York, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1889.

Ciampa, Roy E., and Brian S. Rosner. The First Letter to the Corinthians. Logos Research Edition. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010.

New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update. Logos Research Edition. La Habra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995.

Sproul, R. C., ed. The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (2015 Edition). Logos Research Edition. Orlando, FL: Reformation Trust, 2015.

The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Logos Research Edition. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016.

The Holy Bible: King James Version. Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009.

The Holy Bible: New International Version. Logos Research Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984.

The NET Bible First Edition. Logos Research Edition. Biblical Studies Press, 2005.

Vaughan, Curtis, and Thomas D. Lea. 1 Corinthians. Logos Research Edition. Founders Study Commentary. Cape Coral, FL: Founders Press, 2002.

Related Media

Related Sermons