First Corinthians 11:24 and 25 say, “And having given thanks, He broke it and said, This is My body, which is for you; this do for the remembrance of Me. Similarly also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in My blood; this do, as often as you drink it, for the remembrance of Me.” In the phrase “for the remembrance of Me,” it is better to translate the Greek word rendered “for” as “unto.” Thus, it should read “unto the remembrance of Me.” The word “unto” implies a result, whereas the word “for” indicates a purpose. Having a purpose is not as good as having a result.
To have the Lord’s supper for the remembrance of the Lord means that we have the supper for the purpose of remembering Him. But to have the Lord’s supper unto the remembrance of the Lord means that we have the supper with the result that we remember the Lord. We may come to partake of the Lord’s supper with the purpose of remembering Him and yet our eating of the supper may not result in the remembrance of the Lord. Instead of having the proper remembrance of the Lord, the result may be condemnation on us. Supposedly the believers at Corinth came together to remember the Lord. But the result was altogether different. Their eating and drinking was not unto the remembrance of the Lord, but unto their own condemnation.
In chapter eleven Paul was admonishing the Corinthians to have the Lord’s supper in a way that would result not in their condemnation but in the remembrance of the Lord. It is possible that the result of our eating of the Lord’s supper may also be condemnation instead of the remembrance of the Lord.
The thought embodied in the word “unto” in these verses is deep and profound. It is, of course, not incorrect to translate the Greek preposition as “for.” However, this does not express the meaning or significance here. Here the word is used with the significance of result, not purpose. What will be the result of your eating of the Lord’s supper? Will it result in the remembrance of the Lord, or in condemnation for wrongdoing? This was Paul’s sober word to the Corinthians.
The eating of the Lord’s supper is to satisfy the Lord. But instead of coming together to satisfy the Lord, the Corinthians were seeking to satisfy themselves. The fact that some even became drunk proves that they cared for their own satisfaction (v. 21). To come to the Lord’s supper with the intention of receiving satisfaction for ourselves is against the principle of His supper. We should not come to the Lord’s supper with such an intention. Rather, we should come with the intention to satisfy the Lord.
Merely to render the Lord some kind of shallow remembrance does not satisfy Him. He is satisfied when we have the supper in such a way that it results in the remembrance of Him. Simply to remember the Lord is shallow. But to partake of the Lord’s supper with the result that we have the remembrance of Him is deep. Remembering the Lord is something temporary. It may last only while we are eating of His supper. As we are eating of the supper, we remember Him. But to eat the Lord’s supper resulting in the remembrance of the Lord implies that the remembrance is coming and also that it will continue after we have finished eating. Thus, the remembrance is a continuation of our eating. Our eating results in the remembrance, and the remembrance is the continuation of the eating.