R
rcwitness
Guest
ok. So the Scriptures are His real Word, but the Eucharist is not?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Do you place as much emphasis on His Eucharist as you do the Bible?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
M
Michael68
Guest
Its weird how Sola Scriptura people take the bible literally until they get to John 6. All of a sudden its symbolic! I don’t get it.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
I respect that. Just want to tell you that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is scriptural, as much as it can get.my responses will derail this thread:
so out of respect to the OP
I’ll pass
I do not really know what you mean by sola scriptura, I am a cradle Catholic btw, but not only that, I have very little exposure to Protestantism, mainly due to a traditionally Catholic family background.
If sola scriptura means to base your belief solely on scripture, then I see no problem in the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist to fit that genre. Most of the content of the Eucharistic liturgy either are direct quotes from the scripture or easy references to it.
A
alwayswill
Guest
right I would say : Scriptures ARE graphe theopneustosok. So the Scriptures are His real Word, but the Eucharist is not?
The Eucharist is NOT the Logos
A
alwayswill
Guest
FYIIts weird how Sola Scriptura people take the bible literally until they get to John 6. All of a sudden its symbolic! I don’t get it.
Sola Scriptura practicing Christian do not deny that the writings breathed out by God use common literary forms like metaphors, similes, and hyperbole.
Sola Scriptura does NOT mean we take every line of the Bible literally.
R
rcwitness
Guest
So Jesus set up a symbol of His sacrifice using what fills only the belly?right I would say : Scripture ARE graphe theopneustos
The Eucharist is NOT the Logos
W
wmscott
Guest
That is because it does not fit into their own flawed personal interpretations of Sacred Scripture. It is pick and choose which verses support their position and usually out of context.Its weird how Sola Scriptura people take the bible literally until they get to John 6. All of a sudden its symbolic! I don’t get it.
2 Peter 1:20-21 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
Ver. 20. No prophecy of the scripture is made by private interpretation; or, as the Protestants translate it from the Greek, is of any private interpretation, i.e. is not to be expounded by any one’s private judgment or private spirit. (Witham) — The Scriptures cannot be properly expounded by private spirit or fancy, but by the same spirit wherewith they were written, which is resident in the Church.
Ver. 21. For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time. This is to shew that they are not to be expounded by any one’s private judgment, because every part of the holy Scriptures is delivered to us by the divine spirit of God, wherewith the men were inspired who wrote them; therefore they are not to be interpreted but by the spirit of God, which he left, and promised to his Church to guide her in all truth to the end of the world. Our adversaries may perhaps tell us, that we also interpret prophecies and Scriptures; we do so; but we do it always with a submission to the judgment of the Church, they without it. (Witham)
Haydocks
A
alwayswill
Guest
that’s one way to put itSo Jesus set up a symbol of His sacrifice using what fills only the belly?
similar to the discourse with the woman at the well in John 4
John 4
13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”
John 6:
35… “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.
M
Michael68
Guest
For His body is truly food and His blood is truly drinkthat’s one way to put it
similar to the discourse with the woman at the well in John 4
John 4
13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”
John 6:
35… “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.
A
alwayswill
Guest
That’s what it says:For His body is truly food and His blood is truly drink
R
rcwitness
Guest
But He doesn’t take some water and say, “This is my Spirit, receive it.” He actually says, “the bread that I will give is my flesh”. Then, He takes bread and blesses it and says, “this is my body”.that’s one way to put it
similar to the discourse with the woman at the well in John 4
John 4
13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”
John 6:
35… “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.
It different from His metaphorical only applications. With those, He says “I am a vine or a door”. With His supper, He says “this bread is my body, and this wine is my blood”.
There is a difference.
A
alwayswill
Guest
so moving from John 6 to two years later at the Last Supper:But He doesn’t take some water and say, “This is my Spirit, receive it.” He actually says, “the bread that I will give is my flesh”. Then, He takes bread and blesses it and says, “this is my body”.
It different from His metaphorical only applications. With those, He says “I am a vine or a door”. With His supper, He says “this bread is my body, and this wine is my blood”.
There is a difference.
comes down to this:
did the breaking of the bread and the pouring out of wine appease the wrath of God (make propitiation)?
or was it symbolic and point to the real propitiatory sacrifice of the Christ on the Cross?
At this point I feel we are repeating ourselves:
I need to step away (for other reasons)
Later; I would like to continue the discussion on the propitiatory nature of the Last Supper and its implications of that.
I really do enjoy our discussion.
Have a good night my friend
M
Michael68
Guest
Take care! Please know this; the Last Supper was the first Mass.so moving from John 6 to two years later at the Last Supper:
comes down to this:
did the breaking of the bread and the pouring out of wine appease the wrath of God (make propitiation)?
or was it symbolic and point to the real propitiatory sacrifice of the Christ on the Cross?
At this point I feel we are repeating ourselves:
I need to step away (for other reasons)
Later; I would like to continue the discussion on the propitiatory nature of the Last Supper and its implications of that.
I really do enjoy our discussion.
Have a good night my friend
A
alwayswill
Guest
so was the Last Supper propitiatory and actually appeased the wrath of God?Take care! Please know this; the Last Supper was the first Mass.
R
rcwitness
Guest
It is a participation in that one act of propitiation. Or rather a participation in the body and blood which accomplished that one act of final and complete propitiationso was the Last Supper propitiatory and actually appeased the wrath of God?
The Lutheran view is that the Eucharist is the real and substantial body and blood of Christ, given and shed for the remission of sin. It is a means of grace. To place a means of grace in a position less than the word of God creates a false dichotomy. It isn’t word or sacrament, or sacrament or word. It is word and sacrament.While no one can speak for all Protestants:
I believe I accurately represented the views of MacArthur, Piper, Sproul, Washer, White, Grudem, Keller, etc…
And back to the OP:
The importance of the Eucharist compared to Scripture is directly related to whether or not it is propitiatory.
If Communion actually .appeases the wrath of God, that would make a huge difference in its importance.
It would literally be on the same level of Christ going to the Cross.
That’s why I asked:
Is the Lutheran understanding of Communion that it is propitiatory?
Was the Last Supper propitiatory?
Is the wrath of God appeased at Communion?
Jon
M
Michael68
Guest
Yes, i would agree with this. The sacraments are the means of grace.The Lutheran view is that the Eucharist is the real and substantial body and blood of Christ, given and shed for the remission of sin. It is a means of grace. To place a means of grace in a position less than the word of God creates a false dichotomy. It isn’t word or sacrament, or sacrament or word. It is word and sacrament.
Jon
Thanx Jon!
Not all sola scripturists reject the real presence. Often they read the four accords of Christ’s institution of the sacrament and read the words, “this is my body…this is my blood”,and accept those words as true. It isn’t a metaphor.Its weird how Sola Scriptura people take the bible literally until they get to John 6. All of a sudden its symbolic! I don’t get it.
Only with that in place, does John 6 hold Christ’s true meaning.
Jon
For the participants.It is a participation in that one act of propitiation. Or rather a participation in the body and blood which accomplished that one act of final and complete propitiation
these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
R
rcwitness
Guest
Yes. Baptism is the means of washing sins for the believer, not that he was able to suffer the cross that Jesus bore for our salvation, but that Jesus accomplished salvation for him.For the participants.
Mark
And they said to him, “Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.” But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” And they said to him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized"
We are unable to accomplish the work required of salvation. We are freely given what Jesus has merited. And when we are forgiven, and justified through Him, we do not cease to rely on His grace, but persevere, knowing that we need the grace that comes from His ultimate act of love and sacrifice at Calvary. So, like Baptism, we do not actually persevere by our own power but perpetually draw from the mighty work of God through the flesh and blood of His Son.
So while we rely on the Spirit which gives life, we acknowledge that the mighty struggle and suffering of Christ’s body and blood were necessary for us to walk in the Spirit.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.