by Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.

The religious group with the radio-tv program called “Ang Dating Daan” claims that there’s no church material elements in the ceremony which we call “Lord’s Supper.” This group claims that the Lord’s Supper is breaking the bread of life which is the word that Jesus Christ taught. Basis for this argument is John 6:63, “…the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.” According to this group, the bread/flesh of Jesus in the traditional church Lord’s Supper profits nothing. They say that it is the teaching of Jesus that profits. That when it is preached and absorbed it is the Lord’s Supper.

In a paper based edition of the WORDMINISTRY Baguio, I explained this issue which primarily focused on giving the geogragphical and historical background of John 6. In that study of John 6, we began with Christian chronology. Since our Lord Jesus Christ’s birth is dated as 1 A.D. (anno domini, in the year of our Lord) and Jesus’ life on earth ended in the year 33 A.D., Bible scholars place the date of John chapter 6 at 32 A.D.

Consider also that the year when our Lord instituted the Lord’s Supper during or after the last Passover Supper. Jesus ate His last Passover Supper on 13 Nisan 33 A.D. And Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthian church in 56-57 A.D.

If one uses John 6:63 which was given in the year 32 A.D. to negate or destroy the instituted Lord’s Supper commanded by Christ which was given on 13 Nisan 33 A.D. one makes Jesus Christ the Son of God a confused teacher. Meaning, the”Ang Dating Daan” people make Jesus deny what He will teach and command to His disciples one year after. These people make Jesus deny what He teaches. That’s not a good way of teaching the Bible. I’d rather believe that the “Ang Dating Daan” people are the confused teachers and not my Lord Jesus.

If one uses John 6:63 which was given in the year 32 A.D. to negate or destroy what Apostle Paul taught the Corinthians in 56-57 A.D., it means that the Apostle Paul and the Holy Spirit that inspired the apostles to write were confused teachers. But I’d rather believe that the “Ang Dating Daan” people are the confused students. Si Eleazar Soriano at mga kasama niya ang mga hilong maestro. They are the blind teachers who lead blind followers into the pit.

Why call the ordinance “supper”? It is called supper because it was instituted at supper time. It was first done at evening time. It was started by our Lord at the end of his last Passover Supper or AFTER the Passover Supper. Many things are named after or based on TIME. For example the plant/flower we call “dama de noche.” Dama means “lady” and noche means “night.” Is the flower literally a lady, a woman person? No. Does the plant/flower “dama de noche” remain dama de noche even at morning time? Yes. It is “dama de noche” because the flower brings out its aroma at evening (noche) time. Consider also the flowering plant called “morning glory.” Its flowers bloom best at morning time. But we still call the plant “morning glory” when we see it at evening time. Dapat kantiyawan natin ang mga ADD people that at evening time the “morning glory flower” becomes “evening glory flower” at everning time. Consider also “Sunday dress.” People usually put on their best attire on Sunday for church or for social gatherings. But the Sunday dress remains Sunday dress even if worn on Tuesday. Dapat kantiyawan natin si Mr. Soriano na ang baro nila na maganda ay “Tuesday dress” kapag isuot nila ng Martes.

Ang kantiyaw ng “Ang Dating Daan” is based on crude literalism. They take everyhting literal. But the above examples put them to shame. Also consider the term “hot dog.” Literally, “hot” is “mainit” and “dog” is aso, a canine. Does Mr. Soriano and his followers take “hotdog” literally? If they go to the grocery store, kantiyawan ba nila ang tindera ng ganito? “Miss, bili ako ng hotdog. Ang hot ay mainit, at ang dog ay aso. Kaya bigyan mo ako ng literal na mainit at literal na aso.” In Baguio and La Trinidad, Benguet we have the literal hot dog. We have eateries that sell hot, smoking dog. Hotdog pa rin ang hotdog kahit malamig.

So “Lord’s Supper” means the Supper belongs to the Lord Jesus Christ. It is a memorial in honor of Jesus Christ our Lord. A simple breaking of bread and simple drinking of wine to remember Him who died for our sins.

When Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthians in 56-57 A.D. he called the church ordinance of breaking bread and drinking of the cup as Lord’s Supper. See 1 Cor. 11:20. Pero sabi ng ADD na ipinagbawal daw ni Apostol Pablo na gawin ng mga taga-Corinto itong ordinansa. Maling turo na naman itong posisyon nila. Sa kabanatang ito ng Corinto, hindi pagbabawal kundi pagtutuwid ang ginawa ni Apostol Pablo.

Because some oberve this ordinance at about 9 or 10 o’clock in the morning of Sunday, the ADD people would like to sneer and say “merienda na yan.”
Gusto rin ba nila na kantiyawan natin sila kung sabihin nila na ang isang tanim ay “dama de noche” kahit alas dos ng hapon? “Ay, dama de tardes yan,” sasabihin natin.

Ayon sa Lucas 22:20 and 1 Cor. 11:25, pagkatapos ng hapunang Passover noong isagawa ni Cristo ang drinking of the cup. Ano ang tawag sa inumin pagkatapos ng hapunan? Meryenda ba? Bakit tinawag pa rin ni Apostol Pablo na bahagi ng Lord’s Supper ang saro, eh, pagkatapos naman ng hapunan ginawa? Hindi naman sinabi ni Pablo na “meryenda” yong inumin na ininum pagkatapos ng hapunan. Bakit hindi kantiyawan ni Soriano si Apostol Pablo? Pero si Pablo ay tama at si Soriano ang mali.

If you have any reaction or interaction regarding this discussion, please write someting an email to us.