D
Dokimas
Guest
Why don’t we go over the arguments on a new (or maybe old) thread?
- Status
U
Usbek_de_Perse
Guest
uhhhh…what arguments?
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
Why do you not open a tread about the K of C, that may be a good tread
J
John7
Guest
you mean arguments with respect to differences in communion between eg CC and other denominations?
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
Do you like arguments that much to start a new thread
D
Dokimas
Guest
Yes.
D
Dokimas
Guest
I maybe should have used another term, I suppose. However, I think it was ProdicalSon1 that challenged someone to start a thread about a particular difference to discuss. He said to be specific and deal with one topic per thread. I think his idea was a good one, sooooooooo…
… let’s dicuss Communion.
From the Apology of the Augsburg Confession:
The reformers here present three things; what they believe, what scripture says, and what has been and continues to be taught throughout the history of Christianity by referencing the ECF’s, and the Church east and west.
Jon
N
Newbie2
Guest
“…who seems to us to be not a silly writer…” 
Curious wording.
Curious wording.
Ok, how about “who seems a silly writer to us not to be”. :whacky:“…who seems to us to be not a silly writer…”
Curious wording.
Jon
EDIT: I think it is a German to English deal. I was raised on the fringe of Pennsylvania Dutch Country, where one might hear sentence structure like: “Throw me down the stairs my jacket.”
L
Libertarian_FL
Guest
Matthew 26:26-28
26 As they were eating, Jesus took some bread and blessed it. Then he broke it in pieces and gave it to the disciples, saying, “Take this and eat it, for this is my body.”
27 And he took a cup of wine and gave thanks to God for it. He gave it to them and said, “Each of you drink from it, 28 for this is my blood, which confirms the covenant between God and his people. It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many. [NLT]
Lets see where did Jesus actual make this mandatory on all Christians as a sacrament? As opposed to the sacramental status of baptism that was clearly required of Christians proven in that by the example of Jesus and His words on the subject.
Seems to me ,at most, its to be a remembering of the life of Jesus of no special importance over that. Until His apostles decided to make it more elevated as a formalized rite which in my clerical opinion was unjustified compared to the simple use of this act. So I prefer to keep this as the Four Gospels dictate when its mentioned a remembering of the Lords not a sacrament as a clergyman. And what the Roman Catholic Church did to this is over the top its bread and wine (or grape juice) not some holy food its such an excess IMHO.
26 As they were eating, Jesus took some bread and blessed it. Then he broke it in pieces and gave it to the disciples, saying, “Take this and eat it, for this is my body.”
27 And he took a cup of wine and gave thanks to God for it. He gave it to them and said, “Each of you drink from it, 28 for this is my blood, which confirms the covenant between God and his people. It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many. [NLT]
Lets see where did Jesus actual make this mandatory on all Christians as a sacrament? As opposed to the sacramental status of baptism that was clearly required of Christians proven in that by the example of Jesus and His words on the subject.
Seems to me ,at most, its to be a remembering of the life of Jesus of no special importance over that. Until His apostles decided to make it more elevated as a formalized rite which in my clerical opinion was unjustified compared to the simple use of this act. So I prefer to keep this as the Four Gospels dictate when its mentioned a remembering of the Lords not a sacrament as a clergyman. And what the Roman Catholic Church did to this is over the top its bread and wine (or grape juice) not some holy food its such an excess IMHO.
John 6 seems to contradict what you say here, as does St. Paul 1 Cor. 10. It isn’t the Roman Catholic Church only, but the entire Church, east and west, and (at least) the Lutheran reformers. Christ leaves no hint that he meant this symbolically, or as simply a remembrance. Is is is.
Jon
L
Lib_Christian
Guest
Christ had not died yet at the Last Supper. So how did the Apostles eat his body? Do this in memory of me… Could then mean Christ was speaking symbolically and to do this as a memorial to Him while he is of course present in spirit as we receive His grace. Jn 6 can easily be read to have a symbolic meaning with “eat” meaning “believe”. To believe (eat) how Christ gave his flesh for us. See verses 29, 35, 40, 47. Yes I know Christ continued using the word “eat” along with “believe” and how it can mean to chew, etc. But he said in Jn 6:63 after his followers were grumbling, that it is the spirit that gives life.
Not to mention how Christ’s Communion was open. He will turn away no one who comes to Him (Jn 6:37). This is why if after praying “Lord I am not worthy but only say the word and I shall be healed”, if I feel so called to receive, then so be it. And if I’m not convinced of the real presence of His physical body, in my heart and mind I’m saying “amen” to the symbol of His body. I discern the body. I discern He gave His body up for me.
Yes I know there are early writings 55 yrs after the NT suggesting the early church believed in a physical RP. But in 55 yrs straying could have already begun.
Not to mention how Christ’s Communion was open. He will turn away no one who comes to Him (Jn 6:37). This is why if after praying “Lord I am not worthy but only say the word and I shall be healed”, if I feel so called to receive, then so be it. And if I’m not convinced of the real presence of His physical body, in my heart and mind I’m saying “amen” to the symbol of His body. I discern the body. I discern He gave His body up for me.
Yes I know there are early writings 55 yrs after the NT suggesting the early church believed in a physical RP. But in 55 yrs straying could have already begun.
C
Charlie_Zeaiter
Guest
Was St Paul being symbolic when he said “For anyone who eats and drinks without recognising the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgement on himself” (1 Co 11:29).
Did the Israelites symbolically eat the lamb for Passover, or did they really eat the lamb?
Did Adam symbolically eat the fruit, or did he really eat the fruit?
I believe that Elizabeth’s choice of words to Mary was divinely inspired; “Blessed is fruit of your womb”. Mary is delivering us the new fruit to undo the fruit that Eve delivered. Eating it is His commandment.
L
Libertarian_FL
Guest
John 6 indicates a metaphore that Jesus is the bread of life and that only He is the path to the Father, true but has nothing to do with the Lord’s Remembrance as stated in the Four Gospels. The other NT books are not the books where Jesus laid upon the world His teachings through four vessels. And are for me commentary and historical as to the works of some of His followers most of which deviated from the example of Jesus and the Way as it was meant to be. In other words unless Jesus demanded that this ritual be done for salvation its not a sacrament its something less but one even I support as a spiritual good, like a Christian doing charitable works.
So unless Jesus said overtly all who believe do THIS its NOT a sacrament. That leaves just one Baptism that is mandated by the Lord Himself.
D
Dokimas
Guest
Luke 22:
14 When the hour had come, He sat down, and the twelve apostles with Him.
15 Then He said to them, "With fervent desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer;
16 “for I say to you, I will no longer eat of it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”
17 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, "Take this and divide it among yourselves;
18 “for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”
19 And He took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “**This is My body **which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”
20 Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.
I have asked this question before and I do so again 1st because it seems an appropriate response to the post I sighted, 2nd because I think it’s a valid point and 3rd no one that I’m aware of has challenged my logic or answered my questions that are part of the point being made.++++
When Jesus gave us communion (if I may put it this way) He was standing (or sitting) before the disciples. He gave them the cup and bread. He said they were His Blood and His Body.
#1 question – was His Body and Blood in tact when He passed the cup and loaf to the disciples and they partook of the sacraments?
- or
#2 question - as Jesus was standing there did part of His Body and some of His Blood mystically go from where He was standing to the cup and the loaf? - or
#3 question - did Jesus cut out part of His Body and drain out part of His Blood so He could be truthful? - or
#4 question - did Jesus speak metaphorically (as it’s illogical that His Body and Blood left Him as He was standing there with the disciples or it is illogical that He cut Himself) and the key to communion is “in rememberance of Me”?
Using John 6 as a reason to think the bread and wine turns into the Body and Blood of Jesus doesn’t make sense to me either. Those that listened to Him seemed to fit into 2 catagories: those who took Him literally and left because they knew they were forbidden to eat human flesh or drink human blood and then there were those who heard Him, didn’t understand what He was saying but knew, whatever He meant, He had the words of eternal life.
N
Newbie2
Guest
D
Dokimas
Guest
Newbie2, would God have us eat human flesh and drink human blood if He forbad it in the OT?
D
Dokimas
Guest
Let’s look at it from the perspective of ‘what’s the purpose of communion?’ or ‘why did Jesus institute it?’
- Status