A Tale of Two Eucharists

[Socrates4Jesus]

The one who created everything that is, said to believe it.

Yes, and as the writer of Hebrews says, it is impossible for Him to lie.

So what does Jesus say about the Eucharist, Steve?

 

[davidv]

Yes, and as the writer of Hebrews says, it is impossible for Him to lie.

So what does Jesus say about the Eucharist, Steve?

And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body which is given for you.Lk 22:19

and;

And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, "This is my blood of the covenant,
Mk 14:23-24

 

[steve_b]

The thing is, SB, i’m not yet convinced of the historical reliability of the quotes you have given to me. I’m about as convinced of them as i am of the events of Socrates’ life. Allow me to explain:

I can see that you’re troubled by the content of those quotes. They are primary source documents, NOT secondary sources, where someone gives an opinion of what they said.
Soc:

I quote Socrates frequently, yet i know there are only 7 ancient manuscript copies of what Plato wrote about Socrates–only seven! The odds that Plato’s works were misquoted or mistranslated or deliberately altered are quite high.

• the ancient world was highly accurate with oral tradition.
• you assume few copies = mistakes, but accuracy increases the more times you copy something? If the 1st copy is wrong, which is what you’re suggesting, mass producing the 1st mistakes won’t make it better. The argument makes no sense.

Soc:

Compare this to the ancient manuscript copies of the New Testament. There are more than 24,900 of them (more than 5,600 written in Greek, more than 2,000 written in Ethiopic, and more than 10,000 written in Latin). The odds that mistranslations or misrepresentations of what the authors wrote have crept into our modern translations are extremely low.

• My friend, I disagree. Luther added to his bible the word “alone” behind faith, in Rm 3:28. He said “alone” belonged there so he inserted it. And Faith “alone” became the rallying cry for all Protestants. And look at how many millions of people are taught it and repeat it with no objection… #'s of copies in circulation does NOT lower the odds of mistranslating or misrepresenting.
• How do you know to trust the Catholic Church to copy correctly on scripture over all those centuries, even before the canon was closed in the early 5th century, but NOT trust it on other writings, like the ECF’s I quoted?
  You’re not being consistent in your trust OR your argument, or on what/why you choose to believe and not believe.

Soc:

The truth is that there is more reliable historical evidence to support the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ than there is to support the life and death of my most beloved philosopher Socrates.

With all due respect, let’s put Socrates aside.

We’re talking about the writings of the ECF’s that I quoted. Ignatius was a contemporary and disciple of St John. It’s not surprising, his statements on the Eucharist dovetail with Jn 6: and the bread of life discourse by Jesus.

Irenaeus was a contemporary of Polycarp who was a disciple of John. It’s not surprising he too writes forcefully on the real presence of Christ body in the Eucharist.

Justin Martyr, a contemporary of men who were disciples to the apostles, and quoted by many Church Fathers, also writes forcefully on the real presence of Christ’s body in the Eucharist.

These are 1st and 2nd century Catholics. And there writings are
evidence of the Catholic belief in the Eucharist.
Soc:

So when you quote from an early church father, i wonder how many ancient manuscript copies containing this quote are there? 12? 6? 1?

Those quotes came from the 38 volume set of the ECF’s. Those volumes are available in theological libraries, online, on CD, etc.

The quotes I gave you are referenced in thousands of religious books, magazines etc.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Quote:Originally Posted by Socrates4Jesus forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif *Yes, and as the writer of Hebrews says, it is impossible for Him to lie. **So what does Jesus say about the Eucharist, Steve?*Quote:
And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body which is given for you.Lk 22:19
and;

Quote:
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, "This is my blood of the covenant,
Mk 14:23-24

And what about these words of Jesus, David?

When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, “Will you give me a drink?” (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.) The Samaritan woman said to him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?” (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.) Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.” *(John 4:7-10)*Was our God and Savior speaking of a literal fountain of youth?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

I can see that you’re troubled by the content of those quotes. …

You forget, SetveB, that i’m not an antagonist of the Eucharist; i’m an agonist. I’m struggling with the concept of the Eucharist to see whether it is really true. I suppose i should give the same explanation of my motive to you that Socrates gave to his antagonist Critias (who later became one of Socrates’ protagonists):

“But Critias … you are treating me as if i’m maintaining that i know what im asking about, and as if i’ll agree with you if i really want to. But it’s not like that at all! In fact, i’m going along with you in investigating whatever proposition is made, because i myself am in ignorance. So, when i’ve considered it, i’m prepared to tell you whether or not i agree with you. Only wait until i’ve considered it.”
(Charmides 165)

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

… They are primary source documents, NOT secondary sources, where someone gives an opinion of what they said. …

By primary source documents, do you mean the original autographs? We do not even have the original gospels and epistles of the New Testament. Are you saying we do, however, have the original writings that these early church fathers penned with their own hands?

The question i’m considering is not one of content, but one of reliability, SteveB. When it comes to the New Testament, the question is this: Since we do not have the original autographs, how trustworthy are the ancient copies?

The answer is that the extant ancient manuscripts are extremely trustworthy. The sheer number of them (well over 24 thousand) practically guarantees that any slips of the pen, mistranslations, or deliberate forgeries are weeded out. Any change in a few of them, that is not found in the rest of them, is not included in the good translations of the Bible you and i read today. This is why the consensus among the majority of biblical scholars is that the New Testament you and i have today is at least 95% the same as the original autographs.

The same cannot be said of the writings of the philosopher Plato (for only 7 ancient manuscript copies of his work survived), or of the Roman Emperor Julius Caesar (for only 10 ancient manuscript copies of his work survived) or of the Roman historian Tacitus (for only 20 ancient manuscript copies of his work survived).

I’m asking, then, how many ancient manuscript copies of the early church fathers that you quoted have survived? I think it is a fair question to ask. The answer you give will tell me how much stock i should put in the quotes said to be attributed to these ancient witnesses.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

You really think Jesus deliberately misled his follwers as a means of crowd control?

Chuck

You cannot “allow someone to refuse something”

You share the Truth with them, on any matter, whether it be they might be an alcoholic, or that Jesus died for them. It is up to them to believe it. …

Chuck and Justin:

Please do not think of this as you against me. We are all in this together! Pay no attention to whether Soc is refuted, or whether Chuck is refuted, or whether Justin is refuted, but make the truth your goal. For, who can fail who finds the truth? or who can be harmed by coming to a better understanding of the truth?

The truth i’m asking the three of us to consider is what Jesus meant when He said this:

“This is why I speak to them in parables: ‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’”*–Jesus (Matthew 13:13)*You may read the quote in context here, if you like: biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=13&version=31

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Soc! (I started taking liberties with your name a few pages back, you knucklehead ) Is that sentence meant to read “…what was once three individual substances would NOW be only two.”?

Assuming that it was a typo: my answer is that yes, it sounds accurate that what once was three individual substances has become two individual substances.

ToAslan:

I think i’m getting closer to wrapping my mind around the individual substance of water. I have you to thank for that!



It appears to me that we have established that an individual substance of some material thing is not an infinitely static thing, but a potentially dynamic thing. Are we on the same page, here?

If we are, then i’d like to ask, does this revelation demonstrate that the individual substance of water is, at least in part, the collection of hydrogen and oxygen atoms in a ration of 2 to 1?

http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/Images/state.gif

 

[MaryJohnZ]

And what about these words of Jesus, David?

When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, “Will you give me a drink?” (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.) The Samaritan woman said to him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?” (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.) Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.” *(John 4:7-10)*Was our God and Savior speaking of a literal fountain of youth?

“Living Water”, it is a phrase that connotes many levels of meaning and to just put it on the level of a fountain of youth would be to trivalize it. Youth isn’t everything afterall. As someone wh who is getting into midlife myself I can say I miss the energy of youth at times but there is bauty in growing old as well. What does it mean to “live”? Christ was living to the fullest on the cross at Calvary when He was completely embracing death. So “Living Water” means much more that just something to bring physical juneation. it means water that refreshes the spirit and strengthens in trials and purges us of the impurities of our own tendency toward self absorption so we can become God centered in our lives. That is why Christ is the Bread of Life because we can’t get that kind of nourishment from ordinary food and our souls need food too. Is the Eucharist healing for our bodies? I believe it is as well. At anyrate. Jesus was talking about more than what you are implying.

He spoke in parables to partly test us on how much we really want to find Him. “Seek and you shall find, knock and door shall open, ask and you shall receive…”

And in today’s gospel He said “Blessed are those who do not see and yet believe”.

Martin Luther said we are saved by faith alone but he lost faith in so many things, that it the most ironic statement he could have uttered.

God Bless everyone on Divine Mercy Sunday.

Mary

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

“Living Water”, it is a phrase that connotes many levels of meaning and to just put it on the level of a fountain of youth would be to trivalize it. Youth isn’t everything afterall. As someone wh who is getting into midlife myself I can say I miss the energy of youth at times but there is bauty in growing old as well. What does it mean to “live”? Christ was living to the fullest on the cross at Calvary when He was completely embracing death. So “Living Water” means much more that just something to bring physical juneation. it means water that refreshes the spirit and strengthens in trials and purges us of the impurities of our own tendency toward self absorption so we can become God centered in our lives. …

Thank you, Mary. So, when Jesus said He would give the woman living water to drink, He was not talking about physical water from a well. I agree!



But about what do you think He was talking? I mean, what is the “water that refreshes the spirit and strengthens in trials and purges us of the impurities of our own tendency toward self absorption so we can become God centered in our lives”?

 

[clmowry]

1st I think we’re off on a bit of a tangent and you’d be better off focusng on “substance”.

That said here’s the problem I have with your thinking on this sub-topic.

1. You seem to be arguing that the “truth” is that Christ did not literally mean His Body and Blood.
2. Those who would not accept this literal truth left.
3. The 12 accepted the literal interpretation and stayed.

Therefore those who believed the “truth” of this “parable” were driven away and His disciples were left believing what was “false” and Christ didn’t bother to correct them

This seems the exact opposite of what happened with the parables.

Chuck

Chuck and Justin:

Please do not think of this as you against me. We are all in this together! Pay no attention to whether Soc is refuted, or whether Chuck is refuted, or whether Justin is refuted, but make the truth your goal. For, who can fail who finds the truth? or who can be harmed by coming to a better understanding of the truth?

The truth i’m asking the three of us to consider is what Jesus meant when He said this:

“This is why I speak to them in parables: ‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’”*–Jesus (Matthew 13:13)*You may read the quote in context here, if you like: biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=13&version=31

 

[MaryJohnZ]

Thank you, Mary. So, when Jesus said He would give the woman living water to drink, He was not talking about physical water from a well. I agree!



But about what do you think He was talking? I mean, what is the “water that refreshes the spirit and strengthens in trials and purges us of the impurities of our own tendency toward self absorption so we can become God centered in our lives”?

I think:
The Holy Spirit which is the Spirit of Love between the Father and the Son and which is given to us in Baptism but which must be fed with spiritual food through the Sacraments ( Eucharist). The Holy Spirit is the life of God within us. it is what allows us to Love in a Holy Way rather than a selfish way. the Holy Spirit guides us and transforms us into other “Christ-like” persons in whom the Father recognizes His own beloved Son. And wherever the Spirit is, there is the Father and the Son. So we become living temples in which God has a dwelling place in our souls, and the waters of life (Holy Spirit) brings forth from us ‘fruit’ which spills out into the world through our words and actions as well…

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

…

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

I think:
The Holy Spirit which is the Spirit of Love between the Father and the Son and which is given to us in Baptism but which must be fed with spiritual food through the Sacraments ( Eucharist). The Holy Spirit is the life of God within us. it is what allows us to Love in a Holy Way rather than a selfish way. the Holy Spirit guides us and transforms us into other “Christ-like” persons in whom the Father recognizes His own beloved Son. And wherever the Spirit is, there is the Father and the Son. So we become living temples in which God has a dwelling place in our souls, and the waters of life (Holy Spirit) brings forth from us ‘fruit’ which spills out into the world through our words and actions as well…

Yes, i think you are correct, Mary. For someone else in this discussion pointed out that Jesus gave the meaning of living water in this passage:

37On the last and greatest day of the Feast, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink. 38Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.” 39By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.

(John 7)
I think you are agreeing with him, that living water was a metaphor for the Holy Spirit working powerfully and effectively in the life of a Catholic. Am i understanding you correctly?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

1st I think we’re off on a bit of a tangent and you’d be better off focusng on “substance”. …

I multi-task for a living–i work in IT!



I was only asking the question, Chuck, because it was brought up by someone else. It’s a good question, but i agree it is only indirectly related to the substance of the Eucharist.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

1st I think we’re off on a bit of a tangent and you’d be better off focusng on “substance”.

That said here’s the problem I have with your thinking on this sub-topic.

1. You seem to be arguing that the “truth” is that Christ did not literally mean His Body and Blood.
2. Those who would not accept this literal truth left.
3. The 12 accepted the literal interpretation and stayed.

Therefore those who believed the “truth” of this “parable” were driven away and His disciples were left believing what was “false” and Christ didn’t bother to correct them

This seems the exact opposite of what happened with the parables.

Chuck

Are you certain that what you think was the truth Jesus was actually teaching, Chuck? What about this truth?

37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6)

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%206:37-40;&version=31;
* *

 

[MaryJohnZ]

Yes, i think you are correct, Mary. For someone else in this discussion pointed out that Jesus gave the meaning of living water in this passage:

37On the last and greatest day of the Feast, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink. 38Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.” 39By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.

(John 7)
I think you are agreeing with him, that living water was a metaphor for the Holy Spirit working powerfully and effectively in the life of a Catholic. Am i understanding you correctly?

yes, Jesus is the Vine we are the branches and the life we receive from the side of Christ and the Church through the Sacraments, sacramentals, devotions, scripture is a Life of grace lived out through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

The Living Water can be given through anything belonging to God, and through which He has chosen to reveal Himself. So these ‘meeting places’ between heaven and earth contain the Presence of God through God’s Holy Spirit. Jesus gives us the miracle of His Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity Present in the Eucharist by the power of the Holy Spirit working through the Church.

So I hope this is not going toward an argument that the Eucharist is totally the spiritual nature of Christ.

I did a piece of artwork depicting the Eucharist and I would post it if I knew how to post graphics. Can you give me a clue?

MaryJohnZ

 

[toaslan]

Then, do you agree that what is the individual substance of water can become the individual substances of hydrogen and oxygen? and what are the individual substances of hydrogen and oxygen can, likewise, become the individual substance of water? That is, are you asserting that it is possible for one substance to become two, and two substances to become one?

yes, Soc, I say that it is possible for
one individual substance to become two individual substances
and for
two individual substances to become one individual substance
and (just for good measure) for
one individual substance to become another individual substance

:bounce:

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

… I did a piece of artwork depicting the Eucharist and I would post it if I knew how to post graphics. Can you give me a clue?

MaryJohnZ

You will need to:

1. 
   *]Save the artwork in some sort of digital format, like a Jpeg. (You might have to use an image editing program, like Microsoft Paint, to resize it to a smaller size, first.)
   *]Sign up for a free Web site at some Web hosting provider, like GeoCities: geocities.yahoo.com/
   *]Follow the instructions at the Web site you created to upload the image.
   *]Copy the URL–that is the Internet address–for the image. (Let me know if you need help with this).
   *]Sign on to www.catholic.com/sponsors/forums.asp.
   *]Post a reply to a discussion.
   *]Click the Insert Image button. http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/editor/insertimage.gif(If you are using Internet Explorer, you might have to first click on the message at the top of the Web page and select Temporarily Allow Popups.)
   *]In the dialog box that pops up, delete the http:// text, right-click inside the text box and select paste.
   *]After you have successfully pasted the URL (Internet address) of the image in the box, click OK.
   *]Click the Submit Reply button.
   Let me know if you need further assistance, Mary.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

yes, Soc, I say that it is possible for
one individual substance to become two individual substances
and for
two individual substances to become one individual substance
and (just for good measure) for
one individual substance to become another individual substance

:bounce:

ToAslan:

Thank you for your patient answers to my questions. I think we’re getting closer to the truth.



Would you agree, then, that the removal of hydrogen atoms is what makes the water one drinks into the air one breaths? For

H2O - H2 = O

does it not?