The word rendered "covenant" is never used in those epistles that were written after

Acts xxviii without reference to Israel. II Corinthians was written before Acts 28:

Hebrews, as it title shows, has a message for those of Israel. The one reference in Eph.

ii.12 refers back to "the time past" when these Ephesians believers were aliens and

strangers, or at most but guests, with regard to the "covenants of the promise." No

covenant is ever mentioned in relation to the "church which is His body." There is a

promise and a purpose given before the age-time (Titus 1: 1-3), but not a covenant, old or

new. That is exclusively connected with Israel. The new covenant is God's gracious

provision for the very people who failed under the old covenant.

After the supper we read, "They sang an hymn (the Psalms known as the Hallel), and

then went out into the Mount of Olives." The Mount of Olives! The last portion of earth

which the Saviour's feet trod before He ascended, and destined to be the first place

touched by His feet when He returns to take the kingdom (Acts 1: 12; Zech. 14: 4). It

seems as though everything has been written and arranged to link the Lord's Supper with

the kingdom, and to sever it from the mystery. Who then has blinded the eyes of

believers, and made them more zealous concerning a kingdom ordinance, than eager "to

know what is the hope of His calling?" Rome has no place for Paul and his doctrine. She

has canonised Peter, mutilated the gospel of the circumcision, robbed Israel of their

future glory, and finds a stronghold in this ordinance (blasphemously travestied as it is)

which belongs to a dispensation past and future. Turning from Matt. xxvi let us consider

I Cor. xi.23-26.

This passage at first sight seems to nullify all that has been said before. For twelve

months the words "Till He come" prevented us from uttering a word as to our growing

conviction of the dispensational character of the Lord's Supper. We shrunk from

touching a subject which appears to deal with the Person of the Saviour, and the loyal

affectionate remembrance of His people. We have not arrived at our present conclusions

hastily, nor heartlessly, but have sought to know the truth according as it is written. First

of all let us consider the statement, "I have received of the Lord." If we turn to I

Cor. 15: 3 we shall read, "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received";

or Gal. 1: 11, 12, "For I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is

not after man, for I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the

revelation of Jesus Christ." Paul continually declared his entire independence of man,

both as to his apostleship and hi-doctrine.

Many at Corinth were being led away by Judaising teachers to doubt or deny his

office. "Am I not an apostle?" he cries, "Are not ye my work in the Lord?" (I Cor. ix.1).

"In nothing was I behind the very chiefest apostles" (II Cor.12: 11). The apostle

immediately follows his words of censure, "I praise you not" (I Cor. 11: 22), with the

reminder of his authority, "For I have received of the Lord." There is no warrant to make

this statement mean more than the immediately preceding context indicates. The

institution of the Lord's Supper was no secret. The apostle Paul received no further

teaching regarding it than could be gathered from the records in the Gospels; he

emphasizes his words in this way to help the Corinthian believers to be more ready to

listen to his rebukes in relation to their abuse of the ordinance.