Was The Lord's Supper Observed Daily In the Early Church?

This article was written by Wayne Jackson. It appeared in the August 1989 edition of the "Christian Courier."

It is becoming increasingly common to hear brethren 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 celebrate the communion; such is an optional matter.

The "Proof-text"

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 those 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.

First, 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 would still be no proof that communion was an everyday occurrence.

Second, the terms "breaking bread" in this passage do not refer to the Lord's Supper; rather, they denote a common meal as evidenced by the fact that they are paralleled with "eat their food" in the same clause. The word "food" translates in Greek trophe, which essentially means nourishment (Arndt & Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 835). 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 body. A comment of Albert Barnes speaks to this point: "Here [meat - KJV] it means all kinds of sustenance; that which nourishes 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).

Third, in Acts 2:42 there is a reference to the disciples "breaking the bread (not translated in our common versions, but present in Greek text). The article indicates that a special "bread" is under consideration, i.e., the Lord's Supper (cf. Acts 20:7 "the breaking of bread" and First 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. 272,3). 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.).

Fourth, there is an interesting context later in the book of Acts which may add some insight to this matter. Near the conclusion of his third missionary journey, Paul had departed from Philippi just after "the days of unleavened bread" - which came just following the Jewish Passover - (cf. Acts 20:6), and he was hurriedly makings his way to Jerusalem. He hoped to arrive there in time for Pentecost - fifty days after Passover (cf. 20:16). In spite of the fact that he had a journey of several hundred miles, which could involve difficult sailing conditions, he took the time to tarry seven days in Troas. Why? The best answer is so that he could meet with the saints of that city and observe the communion with them. Burton Coffman notes: "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, as 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, p. 384). If 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 Lord's Supper.