As there is an analogy between the Jewish holy place and the Christian house of God; so there is an analogy between the furniture of the first tabernacle or holy place, and those who officiated in it, and the furniture of the Christian house of God and those who officiate in it. “In the first tabernacle, says Paul, which is called holy, there were the candlestick, and the table, and the showbread,” or the loaves of the presence. On the golden table every Sabbath day were placed twelve loaves which were exhibited there for one week, and on the next Sabbath they were exchanged by twelve fresh loaves sprinkled with frankincense. The loaves which were removed from the table were eaten by the priests. These were called in the Hebrew “the loaves of the faces,” or the loaves of the presence. This emblem of the abundance of spiritual food in the presence of God for all who dwell in the holy place, stood always upon the golden table furnished by the twelve tribes, even in the wilderness. The light in the first tabernacle was not from without, but from the seven lamps placed on the golden candlestick; emblematic of the perfect light not derived from this world which is also emphatically enjoyed in the house of God!
If, then, in the emblematic house of God, to which corresponds the Christian house of God, there was not only a table overlaid with gold, always spread, and on it displayed twelve large loaves, or cakes, sacred memorials and emblems of the glory of God’s bounty and grace; shall we say that in that house, over which Jesus is a Son, there is not to stand always a table more precious than gold covered with a richer supper for the holy and royal priesthood which the Lord has instituted who may always enter into the holy place consecrated by Himself? If the Jewish priesthood, which could not get sins forgiven, had a loaf which represented each son of Jacob, would not God, the Father not have a loaf/cake/portion of bread for His only begotten Son as a memorial when the priesthood, which could get absolution of sin, assembled??
But we are not dependent of analogies, nor far fetched inferences, for the proof of this position. Paul, who perfectly understood both the Jewish and Christian Institutions, tells us, that there is in the Christian temple a table, appropriately called the Lord’s Table, as a part of its furniture. He informs those who were in danger of being polluted by idolatry, “that they could not be partakers of the Lord’s table and the table of demons.” 1 Corinthians 10:21. In all his allusions to this table in this connection, he represents it as continually approached by those in the Lord’s house. “The cup of the Lord” and “the bread,” for which thanks were continually offered, are the furniture of this table.
The apostle Paul reminds the saints in Corinth of their familiarity with the Lord’s table, in speaking of it as common as the meetings of the brotherhood. “The cup of blessing for which we bless God, is it not the joint participation of the blood of Christ? In this style we speak of things common and usual, never in this manner of things uncommon nor unusual. It is not the cup which we have received with thanks; nor is it the bread which we have broken; but which we DO break. But all that we aim at here is now accomplished; for it has been shown that, in the Lord’s house there is always the table of the Lord. It is scarcely necessary to add that if it be shown that in the Lord’s house there is always the Lord’s table, as a part of the furniture, it must always be there when the disciples meet, unless it can be shown that only some occasions require its presence and others its absence; or that the Lord is poorer or more inhospitable at one time than at another; that He is not able always to keep a table, or to cheap to furnish it for His friends. This would be contemptuous for even the lowest of Lords!!