as a perfect, unblemished sacrifice for sins the next afternoon (of the same day of the Hebrew calendar, Nisan 14). He also retained all his blood for that perfect sacrifice. “He poured out his soul [which is in the blood] to the very death.” (Isa 53:12; Le 17:11) Consequently, during the evening meal he did not perform a miracle of transubstantiation, changing the bread into his literal flesh and the wine into his literal blood. For the same reasons, it cannot be truly said that he miraculously caused his flesh and his blood to be present or combined with the bread and wine, as is claimed by those who adhere to the doctrine of consubstantiation.

This is not contradicted by Jesus’ words at John 6:51-57. Jesus was not there discussing the Lord’s Evening Meal; such an arrangement was not instituted until a year later. The ‘eating’ and ‘drinking’ mentioned in this account are done in a figurative sense by exercising faith in Jesus Christ, as is indicated by verses 35 and 40.

Furthermore, eating actual human flesh and blood would be cannibalism. Therefore, Jews who were not exercising faith and who did not properly understand Jesus’ statement about eating his flesh and drinking his blood were shocked. This indicated the Jewish view on eating human flesh and blood, as inculcated by the Law.​—Joh 6:60.

Additionally, drinking blood was a violation of God’s law to Noah, prior to the Law covenant. (Ge 9:4; Le 17:10) The Lord Jesus Christ would never instruct others to violate God’s law. (Compare Mt 5:19.) Furthermore, Jesus commanded: “Keep doing this in remembrance of me,” not in sacrifice of me.​—1Co 11:23-25.

The bread and the wine are, therefore, emblems, representing Christ’s flesh and blood in a symbolic way, just as were his words about eating his flesh and drinking his blood. Jesus had said to those offended by his words: “For a fact, the bread that I shall give is my flesh in behalf of the life of the world.” (Joh 6:51) This was given at his death as a sacrifice on the torture stake. His body was buried and was disposed of by his Father before it could see corruption. (Ac 2:31) No one ever ate any of his flesh or blood, literally.

Proper, Orderly Observance. The Christian congregation at Corinth had got into a bad spiritual state, in some respects, so that, as the apostle Paul said: “Many among you are weak and sickly, and quite a few are sleeping in death.” This was to a great extent due to their misunderstanding of the Lord’s Evening Meal and its significance. They were failing to respect the sacredness of the occasion. Some brought their supper with them to eat before or during the meeting. Among these were persons who overindulged and became intoxicated, while others in the congregation who had no supper were hungry and felt shamed in the presence of those who had much. With their minds drowsy or on other matters, they were not in condition to partake of the emblems with appreciation. Furthermore, there were divisions in the congregation over the fact that some in their midst favored Peter, others preferred Apollos, and yet others looked to Paul for leadership. (1Co 1:11-13; 11:18) They were failing to appreciate that this occasion was one that should highlight unity. They did not have full realization of the seriousness of the matter, that the emblems represented the body and blood of the Lord and that the meal was in memory of his death. Paul emphasized the grave danger to those who partook without discerning these facts.​—1Co 11:20-34.

(Lo-ru·haʹmah) [[She Was] Not Shown Mercy].

A girl borne by Gomer, the wife of Hosea. Jehovah told the prophet to give the child this name because He would “no more show mercy again to the house of Israel.” God thus indicated his rejection of Israel as a whole. (Ho 1:6-8) Earlier, when Jezreel was born, it was said that Gomer “bore to him [Hosea] a son,” but regarding Lo-ruhamah it is only stated that Gomer “proceeded to become pregnant another time and to give birth to a daughter,” without direct personal reference to Hosea. Though the account does not specifically say, it has been suggested that this child was the fruit of Gomer’s adultery and was not the prophet’s own offspring. (Ho 1:2, 3) There is allusion to her symbolic name in Hosea 2:1, 23.

The casting of lots is an ancient custom for deciding a question at issue. The method used was to cast pebbles or small bits or tablets of wood or of stone into the gathered folds of a garment, “the lap,” or into a vase, and then to shake them. The one whose lot fell out or was drawn out was the one chosen. The lot, like the oath, implied a prayer with it. Prayer was either expressed or implied, and Jehovah’s intervention was sought and anticipated. Lot (Heb., goh·ralʹ) is used literally and figuratively with the thought of “share” or “portion.”​—Jos 15:1; Ps 16:5; 125:3; Isa 57:6; Jer 13:25.

Uses. Proverbs 16:33 says: “Into the lap the lot is cast down, but every decision by it is from Jehovah.” In Israel the proper use of a lot was to end a controversy: “The lot puts even contentions to rest, and it separates even the mighty from one