“It is becoming
increasingly common to hear Christians argue that the first-century
church, under the oversight of the apostles, observed the Lord’s supper
on a daily basis. Hence, it is alleged that it does not matter
upon which day Christians partake of the communion elements. The time
and frequency are said to be optional matters. We have been asked to
comment upon this.”
The chief “proof-text”
for this new concept is Acts 2:46.
“And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking
bread from house to house, did eat their meat [food] with gladness and
singleness of heart.”
Some are contending that
this passage affords evidence that the primitive saints broke bread,
i.e., partook of the Lord’s supper, on a daily basis. The
exegesis underlying this view is flawed in several particulars.
The expression “daily” denotes the frequency with which the
disciples were meeting in the temple. Grammatically, it does not
modify “breaking bread.” Thus, even if it could be established that
“breaking bread,” in verse 46, is an allusion to the Lord’s supper,
there still would be no proof that the communion was an everyday
The term “breaking bread” in this passage does not refer to the
Lord’s supper; rather, it denotes a common meal. This is
evidenced by the fact that they are paralleled with “eat their food”
in the same clause. The word “food” translates the Greek trophe,
which essentially means nourishment (Danker, et al.,
Greek-English Lexicon, 2000, p. 1017). The term (employed
some sixteen times in the Greek New Testament) is never used
of the communion, for such was not designed to nourish the physical
comment from Presbyterian scholar, Albert Barnes, speaks to this point:
“Here [meat -KJV] it means all kinds of sustenance; that which nourished
them – trophes – and the use of this word proves that it
does not refer to the Lord’s supper; for that ordinance is nowhere
represented as designed for an ordinary meal, or to nourish the body”
(Commentary on Acts, p. 59).
Acts 2:42 there is a reference to the disciples “breaking
the bread.” Notice the article preceding “bread” (not translated
in our common versions, but present in the Greek text). The article
indicates that a special “bread” is under consideration, i.e., the
Lord supper (cf. Acts 20:7 “the breaking of bread” and
1 Corinthians 10:16 “the bread which we break”).
However, in Acts 2:46 there is no article in connection with
“bread,” hence a distinction seems to be drawn between the “bread” of
2:42 and 46 (cf. A. Campbell, The Christian System, pp.
272-273). Numerous scholars do not believe that the Lord’s supper is
referred to in Acts 2:46 (cf. R.C.H. Lenski, A.T. Robertson, J.W.
McGarvey, W. E. Vine, etc.).
There is an interesting context later in the book of Acts that may
add some insight to this matter. Near the conclusion of his third
missionary journey, Paul had departed from Phiippi after “the days
of unleavened bread”—which came just following the Jewish Passover—(cf.
Acts 20:6), and he was making his way hurriedly to Jerusalem. He
hoped to arrive there in time for Pentecost—fifty days after
Passover (cf. 20:16).
spite of the fact that he had a journey of several hundred miles yet to
make, which could involve difficult sailing conditions, he took the time
to tarry seven days in Troas. Why? The most reasonable inference
is so that he could meet with the saints of that city and observe the
communion with them. Burton Coffman noted:
“Presumably, this delay from Tuesday till the following Monday was to
enable the missionary group with Paul to observe the Lord’s supper with
the church in Troas, an inference from the fact that no reason was given
for the delay, coupled with the account of the Lord’s day meeting in
Troas immediately after mentioning the delay” (Commentary on Acts,
this reasoning is correct, the following question is entirely
appropriate: if the communion was being observed daily, or if the time
of this commemoration was optional, what need would there have been for
a delay of one week? This is circumstantial evidence for a weekly (not
daily) Lord’s supper.
The Record of Church History
The testimony of the
writings of those who lived shortly after the apostolic age bears
unmistakable witness to the fact that the Lord’s supper was observed
each week on Sunday, and only upon that day. In the Didache (a
document written about A.D. 120), the statement is made that Christians
“come together each Lord’s day of the Lord, break bread, and give
thanks” (7:14). Justin Martyr (c. 152) also speaks of Christians meeting
on Sunday and partaking of the communion (Apology I, 67).
In his book, Early
Christians Speak, Everett Ferguson has observed that the literature
of the post-apostolic age indicates that the Lord’s supper was a
constant feature of the Sunday service. He declares that there is no
second-century evidence for the celebration of a daily communion (p.
Thus, it must be
concluded that there is no biblical authority for the novel concept that
one may partake of the Lord’s supper at his own discretion.
Would you like
others to read this article?