Jesus is here serving the elements to His disciples for the last time. He would shortly be betrayed into the hands of his captors, suffer the anguish of those last hours at Gethsemane, be the subject of a mock trial, and finally allow Himself to be nailed to a Cross and suffer beyond human understanding in order to accomplish the perfect and final Atonement for the sins of His people. This vivid scene was to be commemorated by His disciples in a very special and symbolic manner that would depict not only His last hours on the Cross but His entire life on this earth, coming as a Servant, Prophet, and Priest to His chosen people. His glorious Resurrection and Ascension would enable Him to prepare Heaven for His people. Then He would return and consummate His plan for the ages.

And the Apostle Paul, writing in I Corinthians 11:26, after reminding the Christians at Corinth about the institution of this sacrament, goes on to say, "For as often as you may eat this bread, and drink this cup, you solemnly proclaim the death of the Lord, until He shall come." (LITV)

Some of us have raised a question about the I Corinthians 11 passage, asking why Paul would establish a "cessation point" if the practice were to continue past the time of His Second Coming? Does it make sense for Christians today to observe the Supper in view of Paul’s apparent placing of a time limit that has already expired? Many Preterists have wrestled with these ideas. A few have even abandoned the practice in their churches, believing the sacrament is not for today.

One suggested response takes the shape of the well-known illustration about the mother leaving her small son in the house while she goes to the store, with the words of admonition ringing in his ears "be a good boy, Billy, until I get back." She would never be intending to imply that Billy could acceptably misbehave when she returned from the store! Indeed, this is said to be merely a "point of reference" which was not intended to suggest that the directive would cease at that time. I have used this illustration myself many times, but now there may be good reason to seriously question the application to the Lord’s Supper setting.

While admittedly the word "until" does not always indicate cessation of the activity to which it refers, nevertheless, it can mean precisely that. Indeed, the phrase "until He shall come" may be intending to convey a time of termination when the subject event was no longer to take place. What would be the point of Paul mentioning a restriction on the observance if there really were to be no restriction at all?

I am, in this paper, suggesting that there actually was a time limit or "point of cessation" that the Apostle Paul had in mind when writing that important 11th chapter of his Epistle to the Corinthian church. It seems reasonable to believe that Paul’s "time of cessation" would have been clearly understood by his first century readers since the wording is not all that difficult. But readers of his Epistle today, carrying all sorts of baggage with them, might well come to a different conclusion. So we need to simply understand the language as indeed establishing a precise stopping point, since that is plainly what is being said here. It is not highly symbolic language that Paul is using. It is plain prose. Should we not then interpret his words in a normal and literal manner? Clearly Paul is saying that observing the sacrament would continue until the Lord Jesus returned, and then it would stop. At least those same first century disciples, to whom Paul was writing, would not practice it any more.

More than suggesting this as a remote possibility, I would even go so far as to say that there may well be, not just one, but two "cessation points" relating to the Lord’s Supper. But let us first go back to Luke’s account of the original event. We read in Luke 22 (verse 16) "For I say to you that no more, I will not eat of it until when it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God, never!" And again, (verse 18) "For I say to you that I will not drink from the produce of the vine until the kingdom of God comes, never!" (LITV)

This event recorded in Luke’s Gospel would surely be the last time Jesus would "eat or drink" of the elements in that particular manner and in that same context. He ascended to the Father not long after His Atonement and Resurrection. He was gone! .He would no longer partake of the sacrament before the kingdom of God came in its fullness, and then, only at a later time, after His Second Coming, would He partake of it again. This observation, of course, is not new and is certainly acknowledged by commentators of various persuasions. I am speaking of this as the first of two cessation points.

But what I now want to suggest, and which I believe may have been overlooked by most Christians today, including the majority of Preterists, is something that is very simple, yet very profound. To understand the significance of what I am about to say, it will be necessary to very carefully and consistently apply the same interpretative methodology that Preterists pride themselves in practicing. It is the basic hermeneutical principle of "audience relevance." Jesus and Paul were both speaking primarily to first century believers, not to Christians living in any subsequent generation beyond the first century.

All Preterists understand that Paul was writing to first century Christians. Most other Christians overlook or explain away this basic fact. He was not suggesting that his Epistles would not be useful for the benefit of Christians throughout the ages, but what he wrote at that time was addressed directly to first century believers only. Could Paul in First Corinthians 11 be referring to a yet future "point of cessation" that would happen subsequent to our Lord’s stated "point of cessation" that He referred to in Luke 22:16,18? Yes, I believe this is what Paul had in mind.

In writing to the Christians in Thessalonica, chapter 4, verses 13-18, Paul speaks in vs. 17 of a "catching up…in the clouds…to a meeting with the Lord in the air." We all need to study this amazing passage very carefully. At this same time Hades was emptied (Rev. 20:13) and the great multitude of departed saints were resurrected and gathered together and taken by their Lord to the place He had prepared in Heaven for them. (John 14:2-3) These texts clearly teach a "literal rapture" of all living saints of that first century generation which was fulfilled at about AD 70.

Now the picture comes into focus! At the rapture in about AD 70, the believers that both Jesus and Paul were addressing, the first century Christians, were "caught up" from this earth, joined with the long-departed saints, and taken to Heaven. They were gone! They had been commanded by Paul to observe the Lord’s Supper faithfully during those years they were serving Him on the earth. But there would come a "point of cessation" when they would no longer practice the sacrament. The Lord Jesus would return and rapture them. They would be gone!

Therefore, with light shed on this "until He shall come" passage, it is no longer necessary to try to understand Paul as teaching something like the illustration of the mother and her boy. Now, we see that Paul had a very definite termination point in mind, "a point of cessation," beyond which those exact same people, to whom he was talking, would not be able to partake of the Supper. Why? Because they would not be there! They would be raptured! They would be gone to Heaven!

Dear reader of this paper, many of you have read the fascinating book, The Parousia, by Dr. James Stuart Russell, the renowned 19th century British scholar. You will recall that Russell favored a "literal rapture" of believers at the Second Coming of Jesus. He did not develop this idea very thoroughly, but definitely arrived at this conclusion, exegetically, from his studies.

More recently, however, a contemporary Preterist scholar, taking up where Russell left off and refining many of the details of this momentous event, has written a book entitled, Expectations Demand a Rapture: What Did the Pre-70 Saints Expect? Why Don’t We Hear About the Fulfillment? The scholar’s name is Edward E. Stevens, President of the International Preterist Association, Inc. (IPA) of Bradford, PA.

I have been recommending Dr. Russell’s book since the time when I encouraged Baker Book House to re-print the first 20th century edition in 1983. Thousands of copies of this book have been sold and have been used of God to re-kindle the Preterist movement in our day. It is a wonderful book to give to a Christian who is interested in Bible prophecy.

More recently, since mid-2002, I have also recommended Ed Stevens’ new book because I believe it helps to suggest solutions to many of the difficult problems that many Preterists face in trying to understand certain Bible passages. In fact, it breaks new ground in Preterist studies! As Arthur Melanson says, "It’s the missing piece of the puzzle!" This paper that I have written merely attempts to present just one more example of how these enigmas are being solved by the "literal rapture" interpretation of the Second Coming.

And finally, lest anyone should draw the conclusion that I am teaching that the Lord’s Supper is not to be observed by Christians since the first century, allow me to deny that idea most emphatically. But to explain my position on that point would have to be the subject of another article. Later, but not now, please!

Walt Hibbard