Bread used for Communion

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Webers.Home

Well-known member
May 28, 2018
5,819
1,073
113
Oregon
cfbac.org
#21
.
Gen 19:3 . . Lot prepared a feast for them and baked unleavened bread,
and they ate.

In this day and age of cultured yeast it's not easy to explain what the Bible
means by leavened and unleavened. Well; the primary difference between
the two terms isn't ingredients; rather, the primary difference is decay.

The Hebrew word translated "unleavened" essentially refers to an
unfermented cake or loaf; in other words: bread made with sweet dough
rather than sour dough, i.e. fresh dough rather than spoiled dough, i.e. pure
dough rather than tainted dough.

Given time, fresh dough will become leavened on its own because all flour,
no matter how carefully it's milled and packaged, contains a percentage of
naturally-occurring fungi.

Ex 12:34 . . So the people took their dough before it was leavened, with
their kneading bowls bound up in the clothes on their shoulders.

That gives an idea of how quickly God moved Moses' people out of Egypt
after slaying all the firstborn. They had made bread with fresh dough for that
night's dinner in accord with the law of the Passover instituted in the 12th
chapter of Exodus and it had not yet spoiled; which fresh dough will
eventually do if it isn't kept refrigerated.

Anyway, point being: bread made with sour dough is reasonably safe to eat,
we know that; so serving his guests bread made with tainted dough wouldn't
have been a health issue. However, it's likely that Lot served his guests
bread made with fresh dough due to urgency. Leavened bread is appealing;
but unleavened is quicker because there's no waiting for the dough to rise
before baking it.

Old fashioned leavened bread-- the Bible's leavened bread --is made by
blending a batch of fresh dough with so-called "starter" which is highly
prized by some cooks. The product becomes a blend of good and bad; which
spiritually speaking is not a good thing because it's an amalgam of that
which is corrupt with that which is sound.

1Cor 5:6 . . Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

Yes; it surely does.

"The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in
three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened." (Matt 13:33)

In other words: the woman's dough was no longer pure, it was contaminated
with spoiled dough.

1Cor 5:7-8 . . Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new
lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for
us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the
leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity
and truth.
_
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,776
113
#22
The gospel writers and Paul didn't mention that the bread at the last supper was unleavened.
1. They did not need to since that was a given. Passover and unleavened bread were inseparable. Indeed the following Feast of Unleavened Bread underscores the importance of purging out the leaven.

2. As a matter of fact, Paul did make a point of this. And then brought out the spiritual significance of the feast: Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. (1 Cor 5:7,8)

3. The "feast" is not Passover in this passage, since Christ our Passover had already been sacrificed, thus fulfilling that feast. So this was the feast of the Lord's Supper, the Remembrance Feast which Paul was speaking about.
 

Underwhosewings

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2023
1,318
670
113
Australia
#23
Lord Jesus Christ

Our Passover Lamb



Ephesians 2:15 KJV

Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
 

Underwhosewings

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2023
1,318
670
113
Australia
#24
A good practice, physically and spiritually to not use leaven in the Lords table bread.
As Jesus said, “this is my body”
(Which had no leaven).


Luke 22:19 KJV

And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Mark 8:15 KJV

And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,947
866
113
#25
Do you consider using leven bread for communion unworthy????
The problem reduces to a choice between three, tradition (east or west), the letter, and the spirit.

Christian history is a long, confused trail of incessant debate. A debate based on tradition, the letter, and the spirit.

Do we break the bread, leavened or unleavened bread, or is that choice not important?

Well, the answer will depend solely on the background of the church you attend.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
19,220
6,610
113
62
#26
Nothing you use will actually be Jesus body or blood. It's all symbolic. There is nothing intrinsic in bread or wine that makes them more sacred or holy than any other food or drink.
Having said that, there is nothing wrong with following as closely to the example of Jesus as possible. But the moment you start making rules for others, you have become a modern day Pharisee. It's only a matter of time before you start measuring the size of serving containers and bread sizes.
 

Underwhosewings

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2023
1,318
670
113
Australia
#27
Yes, they are symbolic.
To do in remembrance.
It is not His actual body and blood as some teach.

Luke 22:19-20 KJV
And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
[20] Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,474
13,785
113
#28
1. They did not need to since that was a given. Passover and unleavened bread were inseparable. Indeed the following Feast of Unleavened Bread underscores the importance of purging out the leaven.

2. As a matter of fact, Paul did make a point of this. And then brought out the spiritual significance of the feast: Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. (1 Cor 5:7,8)

3. The "feast" is not Passover in this passage, since Christ our Passover had already been sacrificed, thus fulfilling that feast. So this was the feast of the Lord's Supper, the Remembrance Feast which Paul was speaking about.
And so we have yet another point over which to separate believers... like we needed any more. Good grief....
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#29
And so we have yet another point over which to separate believers... like we needed any more. Good grief....
Should we engage in syncretism for the sake of "unity"?
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#31
We have to be honest.
The statement made here is why I am sold whole heartedly on closed communion. The sacramentalists are not in unity with sacramentarians, and therefore should not commune together.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#33
:eek: I might be in big trouble here... I'm not even sure what I am! :oops:
You are sacramentarian. You have said it yourself, that to you the sacraments symbolic. That is what sacramentarian means.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
19,220
6,610
113
62
#34
Should we engage in syncretism for the sake of "unity"?
You gave me one of those nice white X's with the cool red ball around it. That's cool if someone disagrees with me, but it's only helpful to me if I understand why. Can you share?
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
#36
You are sacramentarian. You have said it yourself, that to you the sacraments symbolic. That is what sacramentarian means.
Thank you so much for that. (y)
For a moment there, I thought I might have to move to Sacramento. :confused:
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#37
You gave me one of those nice white X's with the cool red ball around it. That's cool if someone disagrees with me, but it's only helpful to me if I understand why. Can you share?
Not according to Jesus, who basically ran off all of His followers but the 12 when He said, unless you eat my body and drink my blood you may have no part of me.
When the 12 complained He said, why is this so hard for you. My words are spirit and truth.
Spirit and truth, not symbolic.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
19,220
6,610
113
62
#38
Not according to Jesus, who basically ran off all of His followers but the 12 when He said, unless you eat my body and drink my blood you may have no part of me.
When the 12 complained He said, why is this so hard for you. My words are spirit and truth.
Spirit and truth, not symbolic.
I appreciate the explanation. But he also called us sheep, told us to take upon us His yoke, and to pick up crosses.
It's not that there isn't a spiritual transaction that occurs in the sacraments. There most assuredly is. But even if they were turned into the actual body and blood of Jesus, what would the benefit be? If it were so profitable, why didn't He give it to people while He was on earth?
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
#39
When the 12 complained He said, why is this so hard for you. My words are spirit and truth.
Spirit and truth, not symbolic.
Yes, Spirit and truth, not merely material and literal. This is the way sacraments work in Christianity. They represent and symbolize things. There is often a material component, but it symbolizes something deeper. We must not miss that.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#40
I appreciate the explanation. But he also called us sheep, told us to take upon us His yoke, and to pick up crosses.
It's not that there isn't a spiritual transaction that occurs in the sacraments. There most assuredly is. But even if they were turned into the actual body and blood of Jesus, what would the benefit be? If it were so profitable, why didn't He give it to people while He was on earth?
He did. To His disciples. His other followers left when He said it.