The Lord's Supper in Genesis 14

[biblelighthouse]

Of course we all know that God chose Abraham to be the father of faith for the Church. And we all know that Jesus ordained the Lord's Supper in the NT as a church ordinance.

Does everyone on here agree that Abraham partook of a sort of "Lord's Supper", in a sense, in Genesis 14?

Here are my current thoughts on the subject:
http://www.biblelighthouse.com/sacraments/communion-genesis14.htm

But I am open to revision here. What are your thoughts about Genesis 14 and the Lord's Supper? Anything you would add to my thoughts? Anything you would change?

In Christ,
Joseph

 

[Robin]

you're onto something, Joseph....

Robin

 

[Scott]

Joseph: You may be right. I am not sure. I will say this, though, that the Old Testament believers did eat the same spiritual food and drink the same spiritual drink that we do, which is consistent with your observation. This was a point of contention between Reformed and Roman Catholics. Reformed taught that the Old Testament had genuine sacraments that conferred grace, as do the sacraments of the New Testament. Catholics taught that the Old Testament only prefigured the sacraments to come. Francis Turretin and others used 1 Cor. 10:1-4 to support their point.

"For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. 2They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 3They all ate the same spiritual food 4and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ."

I would think that the bread and wine you mention would fall into this category.

 

[wsw201]

Interesting point, but I think its a bit of a stretch to make the comparison to the Lord's Supper.

 

[Augusta]

That is very interesting. I have been really into finding these correlations lately. I was of course never taught much about this stuff in my arminian church. My latest a ha! was when I heard a sermon that correlated the tempting of Jesus by satan as Eve was tempted in the garden. An undoing of that temptation or a fulfilling rather by not being tempted as the second Adam. It was cool. I am having so much fun with the OT now when it used to be boring. Now I just love it.

 

[Scott]

It looks like Augustine connected the two and appears to have equated them (from City of God, Bk 16, Ch. 22).

He was then openly blessed by Melchizedek, who was priest of God Most High, about whom many and great things are written in the epistle which is inscribed to the Hebrews, which most say is by the Apostle Paul, though some deny this. For then first appeared the sacrifice which is now offered to God by Christians in the whole wide world, and that is fulfilled which long after the event was said by the prophet to Christ, who was yet to come in the flesh, "œThou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek,"[1]"”that is to say, not after the order of Aaron, for that order was to be taken away when the things shone forth which were intimated beforehand by these shadows.

 

[biblelighthouse]

Originally posted by Scott
It looks like Augustine connected the two and appears to have equated them (from City of God, Bk 16, Ch. 22).

Thank you for the Augustine quote, Scott! --- I need to remember that. It's cool to find out that an early church father thought similarly about that passage.

 

[biblelighthouse]

Originally posted by Augusta
That is very interesting. I have been really into finding these correlations lately. I was of course never taught much about this stuff in my arminian church. My latest a ha! was when I heard a sermon that correlated the tempting of Jesus by satan as Eve was tempted in the garden. An undoing of that temptation or a fulfilling rather by not being tempted as the second Adam. It was cool. I am having so much fun with the OT now when it used to be boring. Now I just love it.

--- The OT was never so "alive" and interesting to me until Matt jiggled my brain, and I got convinced of Covenant Theology. It makes a HUGE difference! I LOVE the Old Testament like I never loved it before. (And of course the NT is still GREAT!)

 

[Robin]

Originally posted by biblelighthouse

Originally posted by Augusta
That is very interesting. I have been really into finding these correlations lately. I was of course never taught much about this stuff in my arminian church. My latest a ha! was when I heard a sermon that correlated the tempting of Jesus by Satan as Eve was tempted in the garden. An undoing of that temptation or a fulfilling rather by not being tempted as the second Adam. It was cool. I am having so much fun with the OT now when it used to be boring. Now I just love it.

--- The OT was never so "alive" and interesting to me until Matt jiggled my brain, and I got convinced of Covenant Theology. It makes a HUGE difference! I LOVE the Old Testament like I never loved it before. (And of course the NT is still GREAT!)

Also...recall... Jesus' toil for 40 days in the wilderness in His ordeal with Satan, harkens back to the failure of Israel in the wilderness; the Manna in the desert foreshadows how the Lord "feeds" us today in the Supper; the water in the rock Moses struck/Christ is the Rock pouring forth Living Water; Moses lifting up the brass serpent (as one would lift up a dead-vermin, killed, to show that the enemy is vanquished) -- so too, Christ is lifted-up to show sin and death are vanquished....

The NT interprets the Old because those "types" in the OT point to the fulfillment in the NT!

It's not so much as a verse for verse matching as it is matching themes - the "pictures" in the OT of what was to come....It is NO small reason Christ is referred to as "Melchezidek"! Bearing in mind, God's self-revelation is progressive, we ought not say the covenant meal shared by Abram and Melkezidek IS the Lord's Supper. But this meal affirmed the covenant and pointed to Passover (which was.)

Think of it like one huge story - a movie, if you will....Baby Jesus and Bethlehem is walking-in on the middle of the movie. It's good to remember, the movie (story) started way back in Genesis.....the plotline in this movie is the "Greatest Story Ever Told!"




Robin

 

[Scott]

Augusta and Robin: Those are great observations. The Old Testament is rich in Christ if read typologically (which is proper).

 

[Scott]

"Thank you for the Augustine quote, Scott! --- I need to remember that. It's cool to find out that an early church father thought similarly about that passage."

I would bet nearly all the early fathers saw this, although I have not done a survey. They were very typological and sacramental and tended to see these connections.

It looks like Cyprian made the connection too in his Epistle to Caecilius on the Sacrament of the Cup of the Lord 4 (253 AD):

"In the priest Melchizedek we see prefigured the sacrament of the sacrifice of the Lord, according to what divine Scripture testifies, "˜And Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought forth bread and wine´"¦For who is more a priest of the most high God than Our Lord Jesus Christ, who offered a sacrifice to God the Father, and offered that very same thing which Melchizedek had offered, that is, bread and wine, to wit, His body and blood?"¦In Genesis therefore, that the benediction"¦might be duly celebrated, the figure of Christ's sacrifice precedes as ordained in bread and wine; which thing the Lord, completing and fulfilling, offered bread and the cup mixed with wine, and so He who is the fullness of truth fulfilled the truth of the image prefigured."