“Take, eat”: are we really doing it?

Thursday evening, millions of people around the world will gather for the Memorial of the death of Jesus Christ. It is the most important event of the year for Jehovah’s Witnesses — the only celebration they observe. And they do well: Jesus himself commanded his disciples to remember his death.

But what exactly did he command? And does what happens in the Kingdom Halls today truly correspond to what Jesus instituted that evening?

In Acts 17:11 we read that the Christians of Beroea “accepted the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” These Beroeans did not accept anything by hearsay — not even the words of the apostle Paul. They verified everything against the Scriptures. With this spirit, let’s examine what the Bible actually says about the Memorial.

The scene in the Kingdom Hall

If you have ever attended the Memorial of Jehovah’s Witnesses, you know what happens. The speaker gives a talk on the meaning of the death of Christ. Then the unleavened bread is broken and passed among those present. And the wine is poured and passed in the same way.

But here is the striking detail: no one touches anything. The bread passes from hand to hand, and each one passes it to the neighbor without partaking. The wine makes the same round — and comes back untouched.

Of about 20 million attendees worldwide, only a few thousand partake of the emblems. All the others — the vast majority — merely observe. They look at the bread. They look at the wine. And they pass them on.

But is this what Jesus meant when he said “keep doing this in remembrance of me”?

What Jesus said

Let’s read directly Jesus’ words that evening, recorded in the Gospels and by Paul.

“Jesus took a loaf and, after saying a blessing, he broke it, and giving it to the disciples, he said: ‘Take, eat. This means my body.’”

“Also, he took a cup, and having given thanks, he gave it to them, saying: ‘Drink out of it, all of you.’”

“Also, he took a loaf, gave thanks, broke it, and gave it to them, saying: ‘This means my body, which is to be given in your behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me.’”

“For whenever you eat this loaf and drink this cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he comes.”

“First let a man approve himself after scrutiny, and thus let him eat of the loaf and drink of the cup.”

Let’s notice three fundamental things:

1. “Take” is an imperative.It is not a suggestion. It is not an optional invitation. Jesus did not say “look at the bread” or “just pass it on.” He said “take, eat”. It is a direct command.

2. “All of you” does not mean “some of you.” When Jesus said “drink out of it, all of you”, he made no distinctions. He didn’t say “only you eleven,” nor “only those with a heavenly hope.” He said “all of you”. All those present were to drink.

3. Paul wrote to the WHOLE congregation, with no class distinctions. In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul is not writing to an elite group within the congregation. He is writing to all the Christians of Corinth. He doesn’t say “let those among you who are anointed examine themselves.” He simply says: “let a man approve himself after scrutiny, and thus let him eat of the loaf and drink of the cup” (1 Corinthians 11:28). No one is excluded. No oneis invited to “just watch.”

The bread is a symbol — so what?

Someone might object: “But the bread and wine are only symbols! It’s not as if eating the bread you actually receive anything.”

It is true: the bread and wine are symbols. Jesus used many metaphors to describe himself and his role:

“I am the door.”

“I am the true vine.”

“I am the way and the truth and the life.”

And in John 6:63, Jesus himself clarified: “It is the spirit that is life-giving; the flesh is of no use at all.” So yes, the bread is a symbol. But the fact that it is a symbol makes refusing to take it even more meaningful, not less.

Think about it: if someone offered you an engagement ring and you said “it’s only a symbol, I won’t take it,” what message would you be sending? The symbol has value precisely because it represents something real. Refusing the symbol is refusing what it represents.

And Jesus was very clear about what refusing means:

“Most truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I will resurrect him on the last day.”

“Unless you eat... you have no life in yourselves.”These words leave no room for ambiguity. Jesus did not say “unless you are part of a select group.” He said “unless you eat.” Period.

Who told us not to take?

If Jesus said “take, eat” and “drink out of it, all of you,” then who told the majority of those present not to take?

The answer lies in the doctrine of the “two classes” taught by the organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses. According to this doctrine, there are two distinct groups of Christians:

The 144,000— a limited group of “anointed” Christians who have a heavenly hope. Only they would have the right to take the bread and wine.

The “great crowd”— all the other Christians, who have an earthly hope. These must limit themselves to observing.

But does this division hold up under examination by the Scriptures? Let’s ask some critical questions.

John 10:16 — “Other sheep”

The organization teaches that the “other sheep” of John 10:16 are the “great crowd” with an earthly hope. But the context clearly shows that Jesus was talking about the gentiles — the non-Jews who would become his disciples. The “other sheep” are not a second class of Christians, but Christians of non-Jewish origin. Jesus said: “And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those too I must bring in, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.” One flock. Not two classes.

144,000 — literal or symbolic?

The number 144,000 appears in the book of Revelation — a book full of symbols, beasts with seven heads, horses of various colors, a woman clothed with the sun. If we interpret the 144,000 literally, then we should literally interpret everything else too. But the organization itself recognizes that most of Revelation is symbolic. Why then should this particular number be literal?

Furthermore, Revelation 7:4 says that the 144,000 come from the “twelve tribes of the sons of Israel.” If the number is literal, then so should the origin be — and the 144,000 should all be literal Jews. But the organization interprets the tribes symbolically. You can’t interpret the number literally and the origin symbolically when it suits you.

Ephesians 4:4-5 — “One hope”

“One body there is, and one spirit, just as you were called in the one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism.”

Paul did not write “two hopes.” He wrote “one hope”. Not “a heavenly hope for some and an earthly one for others.” One hope for all Christians. This Scripture alone should make anyone who accepts the idea of two classes pause.

When did this practice begin?

The distinction between those who take the emblems and those who don’t does not date back to the first century. It was not taught by Jesus, nor by the apostles, nor by the early Christians. It was introduced in 1935by Joseph F. Rutherford, the second president of the Watch Tower Society. It was he who taught that the “great crowd” of Revelation 7:9 had an earthly hope and should not take the emblems.

For nearly 1,900 years of Christianity, no one had ever taught that any Christians should attend the Memorial without taking the bread and the wine. This is a 20th century invention, not a biblical teaching.

Jesus’ invitation is still open

Someone might think: “But I am not worthy to take the bread and the wine.” Well, neither was Peter. Peter, who would deny Jesus three times that very night, ate the bread and drank the wine. Judas, the betrayer, had just gone out (according to John’s account). But Peter, with all his weaknesses and his future failings, took the emblems.

And what did Paul write?

“First let a man approve himself after scrutiny, and thus let him eat of the loaf and drinkof the cup.”

Notice: Paul did not say “let him examine himself and then decide whether he is anointed or not.” He said “let him examine himself and thus let him eat.” The self-examination doesn’t serve to decide whether one has the right to take — it serves to prepare oneself to take with the right attitude.

No versein the Bible says “some take, others watch.” No verseestablishes two classes of Christians with different rights to the Lord’s supper. No verse says that the majority of believers must limit themselves to passing the bread without touching it.

When the bread passes before you, ask yourself: who told you not to take it — and who told you to take it? The answer to the first question is a group of men. The answer to the second is Jesus Christ himself.

“Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine.”

“You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

A Member of the Lovers of Truth
03/31/2026