Recently, two posts have brought up a question that I’m very familiar with: “Should the Lord’s Supper be a full meal?”
First, Miguel from “God’s Directed Deviations” asked this question in his post “Grape Juice Drops and Cracker Crumbs Lord’s Supper?”
In all of these questions and positions and discussions concerning the Lord’s Supper (Eucharist / Communion / whatever you want to call it), there is one thing that seems very clear in Scripture: whatever else it may have been, it was a meal.
This is the comment that I left on Miguel’s post:
I’ve always found it interesting that every mention of “the Lord’s Supper” in Scripture referred to a full meal, and many times the same language is used for a full meal when it did not refer to “the Lord’s Supper.” For example, see Acts 27:33-36. Also, Jeremiah 16:6-8 can help us understand what was meant by “breaking bread” and sharing “the cup.”
What do you think? Is it important that we understand that “the Lord’s Supper” is intended to be a meal, or can the meal be set aside?