QTM 306Jesus Died for my Sins Once! Why does communion forgive my sins?

Why Does Communion Forgive Sins?

To the reader:

Many believers ask: why does communion forgive sins? In Christian teaching, two things can seem to clash. On one side, the Bible says the work of salvation is finished. On one hand, the text records the absolute finality of the atonement in the dying words of Jesus:

On the other side, the same Bible tells us to keep doing the Lord's Supper:

This creates a logical tension that many believers struggle to resolve: If the work of salvation was truly completed—"paid in full" in the sense John’s term tetelestai implies [I]—at the cross, why does the church return to the Table week after week? Skeptics often argue that if Jesus’ death were truly sufficient, any ongoing ritual would be redundant at best and a quiet admission of failure at worst. This paper tests that idea against the Bible.

The Bible doesn’t leave this “finished” claim in the abstract. It explicitly applies “once-for-all” language to Christ’s sacrificial work:

This paper, QTM 306, works through this tension. We use the "Berean approach" (Acts 17:11 [E]) —check everything against the Bible—and look at how the "once-for-all" event of the cross interacts with the "ongoing" practice of the Table.

To do this, we must distinguish between the accomplishment of salvation—the objective legal work completed by Christ in history—and the application of salvation—the subjective way believers participate in and receive the benefits of that work today. We use a “Trust Fund” analogy [I]: the beneficiary does not add to the fund by withdrawing from it; they simply access the wealth that was already deposited.

We take the main historical views of Christ’s presence—from Transubstantiation to the Memorial view—and see how each fits the Bible. We also look at the Bible’s serious warnings, including the Corinthian context of partaking in an "unworthy manner" (1 Corinthians 11:27–32 [E]), and the eschatological horizon of the meal:

The goal is not to diminish the significance of communion, but to ground its significance in the right place: the finished work of Christ. We invite you to look at the wording, the flow of the passages, and the evidence of why we commune when Christ has already said, "It is finished."

Let's look at the evidence.

1.0 The Accomplishment: Defining "Finished"

Before we can understand the ongoing practice of the Table, we have to be clear about what the cross was. If the cross were only a martyrdom or a good example, we might need to repeat something to keep the impact alive. But the Bible presents the cross as a transaction that altered the legal status of the believer permanently.

To establish this, we must examine the lexical data regarding Jesus’ final declaration and the structural argument found in the Epistle to the Hebrews.

1.1 The Lexical Data: Tetelestai

The narrative reaches its climax with a single word in the Greek text:

The Greek word translated "It is finished" is tetelestai. To understand the theological weight of this term, we must look at its grammatical form and historical usage [C].

• Grammatical Form: Tetelestai is in the perfect tense. In Greek grammar, the perfect tense indicates an action that was completed in the past but has ongoing, permanent results in the present [C]. It is not merely "it ended" (aorist tense); it is "it stands finished."
• Historical Usage: Archeological evidence from the first century—specifically papyri fragments found in Egypt—shows tetelestai written on tax receipts and business documents [C].

So [I]: When Jesus said this word, He wasn't just saying His life was ending. He was saying a transaction was complete. The debt of sin wasn't partly paid—it was paid in full.

1.2 The "once for all" argument in Hebrews

John 19:30 gives us the word; the book of Hebrews gives us the argument. The author of Hebrews builds a clear case contrasting the repetition of the Old Covenant with the finality of the New.

The text explicitly links "repetition" with "insufficiency":

The text then contrasts the Levitical priests with Christ:

Note the physical posture [I]:

• The Old Covenant priests stood (their work was never done).
• Christ sat down (His work was completed).

This “sitting down” is not a casual detail. It is a direct echo of a Messianic decree:

The Data Point [E]: The Messiah is commanded to “sit” at God’s right hand.
The logic [I]: The Old Covenant priests never sat in the Tabernacle or Temple because their work was never finished; the furniture lists in Exodus and Kings include no chair for the priest.
The Implication [I]: Christ’s “sitting down” signals not exhaustion but enthroned completion. The sacrificial work that could never be finished under the Law has reached its terminal state in Him.

1.3 Conclusion: The work is complete

From this we conclude: the accomplishment of salvation is done. Nothing can be added [I].

This verse introduces the critical distinction we use in this paper:

1. "Made perfect forever" (Perfect Tense): The objective status of the believer before God. This is the Accomplishment.
2. "Being made holy" (Present Participle): The subjective growth of the believer in time. This is the Application.

The author of Hebrews drives the point to a hard stop:

Bottom line: Nothing can be added to the work of the cross. Any view of communion that says we are re-sacrificing Christ or adding to His finished work to get more forgiveness goes against the New Testament. The debt is paid. The account is settled. The Priest has sat down.

That doesn't mean our actions don't matter or that grace means we can ignore how we live. The Bible addresses that idea:

Reality [I]: The cross doesn’t create a loophole; it creates a new identity. What Christ did (Section 1) changes our status before God; how we live it out (Section 2) changes our daily life.

2. The Application: What Remembrance Does

Section 1 showed the Accomplishment —what was done once at the cross. Section 2 looks at the Application (the subjective way the believer interacts with that status). The Lord’s Supper is where that happens. The question: Is repeating the meal a "re-sacrifice" (which would contradict Hebrews) or a way to draw on a finished reality?

2.1 What "remembrance" means: Anamnēsis

The command for repetition is centered on a specific Greek term:

The word for "remembrance" is anamnēsis. In a modern context, "remembrance" often implies a passive mental recall of a distant, absent event. But the word and its context suggest something more active [C].

1. The Hebrew Root: In the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament), anamnēsis is often used to translate the Hebrew zakar. In the biblical worldview, zakar is not merely "thinking about the past"; it is an action that makes a past covenantal reality present and effective in its results [C].
2. The Passover Context: The Lord’s Supper does not appear in a vacuum; it is a deliberate new Passover.
   “This is a day you are to commemorate (zakar); for the generations to come you shall celebrate it as a festival to the Lord—a lasting ordinance.” (Exodus 12:14, NIV [E])
   Key point [E]: Israel was told not just to think about the Exodus but to re-enact it every year in a meal.
   The logic [I]: At Passover, each generation said “God brought us out” (Deuteronomy 6:20–23), not “them.”
3. The New Covenant Anchor:
   KEY VERSE [E] The "new covenant" Jesus inaugurates at the Table was prophesied centuries earlier:
   "The days are coming," declares the Lord, "when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah... For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more." (Jeremiah 31:31–34, NIV [E])
   
   SO [I] The Old Covenant required repeated sacrifices because sins were "remembered" annually (Hebrews 10:3 [E]). The New Covenant's defining feature is that sins are "remembered no more"—which is why the sacrifice cannot be repeated. To repeat it would be to "remember" what God has promised to forget.
4. The logic [I]: When Jesus ties anamnēsis to a covenant meal, He is setting up a covenant act that brings the once-for-all rescue from sin into the present for each generation. The cross is the one decisive event; remembrance doesn’t repeat it—it lines up our present with that finished work.

The Inference [I]: Remembrance is how we access what Christ already did. We don’t add to it by taking communion; we draw on what was already done.

2.2 Proclamation: 1 Corinthians 11:26

The Bible describes communion as a proclamation.

The logic [I]:

• Proclamation vs. Performance: To "proclaim" (katangellō) is to announce a fact, not to perform a deed.
  Lexical Note [C]: In the New Testament and wider Greek usage, katangellō often carries the sense of public announcement—the heralding of news (e.g., Acts 13:5; 17:3 [E]).
• The Eschatological Horizon: The phrase "until he comes" provides the system’s expiration date. The Table is a temporary interface used during the "Already/Not Yet" phase. The same story-arc culminates in a future meal:
  “Then the angel said to me, ‘Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!’ And he added, ‘These are the true words of God.’” (Revelation 19:9, NIV [E])
  The Data Point [E]: History is moving toward a final covenant meal—the wedding supper of the Lamb.
  The logic [I]: The Table is a beta version of that final banquet: a temporary interface that will be “uninstalled” when the Architect returns.

The Implication [I]: Because it is a proclamation of a past event ("the Lord's death"), it reinforces the finality of that death. You do not proclaim a work that is still in progress; you proclaim a victory that is already won.

2.3 Participation: Koinōnia

The Bible says the Table involves real participation.

The word for "participation" is koinōnia (fellowship, sharing, communion).

The logic [I]:

• Vertical and Horizontal Dimensions: Koinōnia involves both a vertical participation in Christ and a horizontal participation with the body.
  “Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf.” (1 Corinthians 10:17, NIV [E])
  Key point [E]: The “one body” language is central:
  "There is one body and one Spirit... one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all..." (Ephesians 4:4–6, NIV [E])
  The logic [I]: The Table is not merely a symbol of unity; it is a participation in the one body that already exists. To partake while denying that unity is to contradict the very reality the meal signifies.
• Real Presence Without Re-Sacrifice: The Bible uses “altar” language to describe this ongoing access:
  “We have an altar from which those who minister at the tabernacle have no right to eat.” (Hebrews 13:10, NIV [E])
  Key point [E]: Christ’s role now is not to sacrifice again but to bring us the benefits of His once-for-all sacrifice:
  "For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant..." (Hebrews 9:15, NIV [E])
  The logic [I]: A mediator administers an existing agreement; he does not re-negotiate it. Christ's heavenly ministry is the ongoing application of a finished transaction.

2.4 The Bible's serious warning

Because the Table connects us to Christ’s finished work, the Bible gives a serious warning about misusing it.

The logic [I]:

• The "Breach Log": Paul logs the specific abuse before he issues the warning:
  “For when you are eating, some of you go ahead with your own private suppers... one person remains hungry and another gets drunk. ...Or do you despise the church of God by humiliating those who have nothing?” (1 Corinthians 11:21–22, NIV [E])
  The logic [I]: The “unworthy manner” was not that sinners were present, but that some were denying the unity of the body and despising the church of God.
• Self-examination: The word dokimazō means to test (like testing metal).
  Lexical Note [C]: The verb dokimazō was used for testing metals to prove their genuineness.
  The logic [I]: Self-examination is not about achieving sinless perfection but about testing whether one’s faith and conduct are aligned with the Gospel.

2.5 Conclusion: The Application Layer

So the Lord’s Supper is not a "top-up" for a weak atonement. It is a Proclamation of a finished victory, a Participation in a living Savior, and a Remembrance that connects our present to what Christ did once for all.

Bottom line: Repeating the Table doesn't mean the cross wasn't enough; it means the cross is infinitely enough. We don't repeat the sacrifice; we repeatedly draw on a sacrifice that can never run out. We repeat the meal because we can never exhaust what was "paid in full" at the cross [I].

3. Historical Views and the Forgiveness Question

We’ve seen the Accomplishment (Section 1) and the Application (Section 2). Now we look at the main views the church has held about Christ’s presence at the Table. The tension between "It is finished" and "Do this" has led to different ideas. We check each view against the Bible to see which fits the finished work of Christ.

3.1 Four main views

Historically, the church has held four major views about Christ’s presence at the Table. We weigh each against Hebrews 10 (finished work) and 1 Corinthians 10 (real participation).

1. Transubstantiation (Roman Catholic view): Asserts that the bread and wine change substance into the actual body and blood of Christ, often viewed as a propitiatory sacrifice.
   • The Data Point [E]: This view leans heavily on the apparent literalism of Jesus’ words: "Take and eat; this is my body." (Matthew 26:26, NIV [E])
   • The problem [I]: This view runs into Hebrews 10:11–12 and 10:18. It has the Priest standing back up to offer sacrifices again—but Hebrews says sacrifice for sin is no longer needed.
   • Another issue [I]: When Jesus said “this is my body,” His physical body was still at the table, separate from the bread.
2. Consubstantiation (Lutheran view): Asserts that Christ is present "in, with, and under" the elements, like heat in a heated iron, without changing their substance.
   • The Metaphysical Patch [C]: Appeals to the communicatio idiomatum to argue Christ's physical body shares in divine omnipresence.
   • The Data Point [E]: However, the Bible treats Christ’s human body as locatable: "This same Jesus... will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven." (Acts 1:9–11, NIV [E])
   • Also [E]: "Set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God." (Colossians 3:1, NIV [E])
   • The logic [I]: If Christ's physical body were ubiquitous, the command to seek Him "where Christ is" would be meaningless.
3. Memorialism (Zwinglian/Baptist view): Asserts that the Table is strictly a symbolic act of remembrance; Christ is present only in the believer's mind.
   • Strength [I]: Rightly emphasizes "do this in remembrance of me" and the sufficiency of the once-for-all sacrifice.
   • The Low-Bandwidth Error [I]: However, if the Supper is reduced to a purely mental recollection, then Paul’s language of koinōnia (participation) in 1 Corinthians 10:16 [E] becomes strangely redundant.
4. Spiritual Presence (Reformed view): Asserts that Christ is not physically in the bread, but the believer is spiritually raised by the Spirit to commune with the seated Christ.
   • The Data Point [E]: "And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus." (Ephesians 2:6, NIV [E])
   • The logic [I]: We do not drag Christ down from heaven to re-sacrifice Him. Rather, by the Spirit, we are lifted into communion with the One who is already seated there. This provides a coherent “network path” between the once-for-all sacrifice and the ongoing participation.

3.2 Does communion forgive sins? Matthew 26:28

A critical question remains: Does taking communion forgive sins?

Grammar note [C]: The phrase “for the forgiveness of sins” uses the Greek preposition eis. The same construction appears in Acts 2:38.

• The Grammar Audit [C]: The phrase is grammatically linked to the participle "poured out" (ekchunnomenon), not to the command to "drink".
• The logic [I]: The saving act (Christ’s blood poured out) is linked to a public rite (the Cup). The rite is the way to receive and certify what the saving act secured, not a mechanical engine that generates forgiveness.

3.3 The Skeptic’s Objection: Repetition vs. Finality

Finally, we must address the skeptic’s logic: "If Jesus died once for all, why do we keep doing communion? Doesn't the repetition suggest the first time didn't work?"

This objection confuses an Event with a Relationship.

The Wedding Analogy [I]: A couple does not celebrate their anniversary to become married again. They celebrate it because they are married. The repetition of the dinner does not undermine the finality of the wedding; it honors it.

Key point [E]: The Bible grounds the repeated meal in a command to proclaim: "For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes." (1 Corinthians 11:26, NIV [E])

The logic [I]: Repetition here is a function of proclamation, not insufficiency. You do not stop telling a story because the story is complete; you keep announcing it because it is complete.

4. Looking Forward: Proclamation and Hope

The Table looks back (Section 1), looks at the present (Section 2), and looks forward. The meal points to the future God has promised.

4.1 Proclamation

The Data Point [C]: The verb katangellō ("proclaim") is the language of public announcement—the heralding of news (cf. Acts 17:3, NIV [E]).

The logic [I]: Communion is a "speech act." The Table is not a private mystical signal; it is a public broadcast into history and to the powers (cf. Ephesians 3:10, NIV [E]).

4.2 The "Until" Variable: The King’s Fast

The word "until" (achris hou) creates a temporal boundary for the ritual. This is reinforced by Jesus’ own vow of abstinence:

The Data Point [E]: The Bible already contains a pattern of covenantal abstinence in the Nazirite vow (Numbers 6:3–5).

The logic [I]: Jesus’ promise not to drink “until that day” functions like a royal Nazirite vow—a King’s Fast. He refuses to lift the cup again until the mission is complete and His people are gathered.

4.3 The wedding supper to come

The Table we have now is a foretaste of the final feast. We repeat the meal because we are anticipating, not because the cross was insufficient.

This New Testament hope is grounded in the Old Testament promise of a physical, tangible restoration:

Reality check [I]: Some picture heaven as non-physical. The Bible promises resurrected bodies on a renewed earth (Revelation 21:1-2).

4.4 Conclusion

The Lord’s Supper is the bridge between the “It is finished” of the past and the “Behold, I am making all things new” of the future.

Bottom line: The Table is for this age. It’s a provision for the journey, not the final destination.

5. What Communion Does: Four Functions

According to the Bible, communion does four things:

5.1 The four functions

1. Remembrance (Anamnēsis): We connect with the finished work of Christ. (Luke 22:19, Exodus 12:14).
2. Proclamation: A Public Broadcast that announces the gospel to the powers. (1 Corinthians 11:26, Ephesians 3:10).
3. Participation (Koinōnia): The spiritual Network Path to the seated Christ. (1 Corinthians 10:16, Hebrews 10:12, Ephesians 2:6).
4. Anticipation: A Beta Version of the Marriage Supper, enacted during the King’s Fast. (Matthew 26:29, Revelation 19:9).

5.2 The “unworthy manner”

The logic [I]: "Discerning the body" involves two layers of verification:

1. Vertical Verification: Recognizing the elements are spiritually linked to the sacrifice of Christ.
2. Horizontal Verification: Recognizing the "Corporate Body" (the Church). To partake while harboring division is a Packet Loss error.

The logic [I]: The Table is not a minefield for the anxious; it is an open door for the forgiven. The proper posture is confident humility.

5.3 How often? The Berean approach

How often? [I]: The Bible does not set a specific frequency. Early Christians did it daily (Acts 2:46) or weekly (Acts 20:7). The command is "whenever you eat"—regularly, without a fixed calendar.

What matters most [I]: The "first importance" is the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). How we do communion is secondary.

5.4 Practical steps

1. Know the Accomplishment: Be clear that the sacrifice is once for all (Hebrews 10:12).
2. Come to participate: Approach the Table for koinōnia (participation), not to re-sacrifice.
3. Examine yourself: Self-examination (dokimazō) and discern the body (the church).
4. Proclaim: Eat and drink as a public declaration of the Lord’s death until He comes.

6. References