Communion misinterpreted?

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I was talking with my boyfriend the other day who is Baptist. We often have discussions about religion and this time we were talking about communion. He said he doesn’t believe in the eucharist as the actual body and blood of Christ because Catholics interpreted early scripture wrong. We take it as “this IS my body…” He says the ealy original scripture had it as “this is a SYMBOL of my body…”
I’m not quite sure what he is referring to. I would ask him myself but he’s away and communication is scarce, and am very curious. Does anyone know what early scripture or translation he was referring to? I think he meant the one that came before Greek, but my biblical knowledge as far as the order of languages and translations is lacking. I’m working on it! I can’t answer him with scripture because the translation of it is the argument. Any insight from both sides would be helpful!

The meaning of “body” matters here. The Body of Christ is received in this Sacrament - it does not follow, that He is present in the same way as a body is present, or in way like it. He is present sacramentally - & this mode of Presence (there are others, as Scripture & reason both show) is non-spatial: it is perceptible, not by the senses, nor by extensions of them such as lab equipment; but only by the intellect, once this is enlightened by God’s grace.​

So when he says what he does not “believe in”, what belief is your bf rejecting: the Catholic teaching on the subject - or, something he thinks, mistakenly, is the Catholic teaching ?

 

[Rolltide]

Here’s a really long post that I made about a year back about the Real Presence. You are free to copy and use it. It extensively references historical documents and the Early Church Fathers about the Eucharist.

Please look at post #4:
catholic-forum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28818