Eucharist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Timmy_Z
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Timmy,

You have not responded to St. Paul. You have ignored the posts that quote St. Paul…I assume you have just missed the points…caught up in the thread …

Q1: How can one eat and drink to their death if they partake of the Eucharist without discerning the “Body and Blood” of Jesus?

Q2: What does ot mean to approach the Eucharist in a state of un-worthiness?

Q3: Can you aproach a ‘memorial’ or partake of a ‘memorial’ in such a manner as to kill [damn] your [eternal] soul? If so how does [and why would] this occur?
 
Take it easy on Link everyone. I also believe the sacraments are meaningless or hindrances to a relationship with God (just like the rituals of the pharisees). I started this thread because it appears Justin Martyr disagrees with me and I wanted to examine it futher and hear a view contrary to mine (the catholic one).
How can you and others call it meaningless since we in the Catholic mindset believe the Eucharist IS JESUS CHRIST. How can God hinder us for we Catholics acknowledges God’s presence within the Eucharist?

These so called rituals does not negate God. Anyone with a Protestant find them ritualistic like the Pharisees, but to us Devout Catholic believe the Eucharist is very REAL.

The other Sacraments of the Church are institute by Jesus Christ himself through His Church.

To say these are meaniningless and leads us away from God is like saying. “God is meaningless because He leads us away from God.”

That is the logic how I see it for Protestants who think this is meaningless. I would be very cautious to any Non-Catholic Christian to call these meaniningless.
Come on, no protestant really believes that.
More Later,
Tim
Most Protestants don’t believe because they think it is SYMBOLIC which totally go against what Jesus said in John 6, and what Paul said in His letter to the Corinthians regarding the Body and Blood of the Lord.
 
Timmy Z:
Quote it please?
Didache written around (50-150 AD):
Chapter 9. The Eucharist. Now concerning the** Eucharist**, give thanks this way. First, concerning the cup:
Code:
We thank thee, our Father, for the holy vine of David Thy servant, which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever..
And concerning the broken bread:
Code:
We thank Thee, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy kingdom; for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever..
But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, “Give not that which is holy to the dogs.”

Chapter 10. Prayer after Communion. But after you are filled, give thanks this way:
Code:
We thank Thee, holy Father, for Thy holy name which You didst cause to tabernacle in our hearts, and for the knowledge and faith and immortality, which You modest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever. Thou, Master almighty, didst create all things for Thy name's sake; You gavest food and drink to men for enjoyment, that they might give thanks to Thee; but to us You didst freely give spiritual food and drink and life eternal through Thy Servant. Before all things we thank Thee that You are mighty; to Thee be the glory for ever. Remember, Lord, Thy Church, to deliver it from all evil and to make it perfect in Thy love, and gather it from the four winds, sanctified for Thy kingdom which Thou have prepared for it; for Thine is the power and the glory for ever. Let grace come, and let this world pass away. Hosanna to the God (Son) of David! If any one is holy, let him come; if any one is not so, let him repent. Maranatha. Amen.
newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm -Didache
 
Eucharist in the Bible (Earliest Testimony):

John 6:51-55 said:
51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. 53 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 54 Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. 55 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

1 Cor 11:26-30 said:
26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.
 
There are many views on the dating of the gospels (John not being written until AD 95 is usually reserved for atheists with an agenda). I believe the best evidence is for the completion (writing) of the NT prior to AD 70.

My thought was that perhaps ignatius fell away from John and invented the false view of the eucarist. To have someone fall away from an apostle would not be unprecedented, as in the NT people fell away from Paul (due to circumcision).

If only people who agree with your faith debate here, it kind of destroys the point of an apologetics forum 😉

Yes, let us return to this topic.

So far we have 4 people in the second century and 4 people in the third century with ignatius acknowleging dissent. Does 8 people during two centuries make a tradition?

Thanks for the replies,
Tim
Timmy, you seem to be looking for who had the majority position on real presence or symbolic.

In John 6:60 we read: “Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’” These were his disciples, people used to his remarkable ways. He warned them not to think carnally, but spiritually: “It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (John 6:63; cf. 1 Cor. 2:12–14).

But he knew some did not believe. (It is here, in the rejection of the Eucharist, that Judas fell away; look at John 6:64.) “After this, many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him” (John 6:66)

To me Sciprture makes it clear the the real presence was perhaps a minority position among the disciples, not among the Apostles who hung with him. Most of his messages were minority positions. Those that could not accept walked away, those who had difficulty but had faith stayed. It doesn’t matter what the majority thought…just what he said and meant. That is crystal clear.
 
From Justin Martyr’s first apology AD 150:
Are there any earlier examples of the belief? Are there other examples of such blatant declarations of the belief this early?
Thanks,
Tim
Since you obviously don’t accept the Scriptures I posted how about other writings?
Earlier than 150? How about 70 a.d.?
americancatholictruthsociety.com/articles/euch.htm
www.americancatholictruthsociety.com:
The Didache (means “teaching”) or “The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles” was written in Syria between 70 A.D. and 110 A.D. This “Teaching of the Twelve Apostles” contains the oldest Eucharistic prayer, liturgical worship, directions on Baptism, fasting, prayer, and the treatment of bishops and other clergy. It was used by bishops and priests for the instruction of catechumens. Many early Christian writers have referenced the “Teaching of the Twelve Apostles” or “Didache”. The document tells us Catholics about the Mass and Eucharist in 70 A.D.:
“Let no one eat and drink of your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; to this, too the saying of the Lord is applicable: ‘Do not give to dogs what is sacred’”. -Ch. 9:5
“On the Lord’s own day, assemble in common to break bread and offer thanks; but first confess your sins, so that your sacrifice may be pure. However, no one quarreling with his brother may join your meeting until they are reconciled; your sacrifice must not be defiled. For here we have the saying of the Lord: ‘In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice; for I am a mighty King, says the Lord; and my name spreads terror among the nations.’” -Ch 14
 
You have not responded to St. Paul. You have ignored the posts that quote St. Paul
I was trying to keep this thread on topic about whether the early church agreed with my view on Scripture. (regarding debating Scripture and the eucharist I wrote in post #7):
I am most interested in the teachings of the church fathers. I have read the Bible and particularly the NT many times. I simply do not see the eucharist, and particularly find sacramentalism contrary to the general thrust of the NT
I am not seeing transubstantiation in the didache quotes provided. Is there any indication of the real presence in the didache?

Thanks,
Tim
 
I am not seeing transubstantiation in the didache quotes provided. Is there any indication of the real presence in the didache?

Thanks,
Tim
When Jesus says This **IS **my body…

What exactly are you seeing or hearing? I cannot understand how it can get any more clearer than that.

I am afraid that if you refuse to see that than you are making the bible a book of your own personal beliefs.
 
When Jesus says This IS my body…
What exactly are you seeing or hearing? I cannot understand how it can get any more clearer than that
Jesus claims to be a door, a vine, a gate, bread, etc… The NT is rich with symbolism. Would you disagree?

-Tim
 
Jesus claims to be a door, a vine, a gate, bread, etc… The NT is rich with symbolism. Would you disagree?

-Tim
Yes but in those parable did anyone left and said, “THIS IS HARD SAYING.”

Compare the Bread Discourse in John 6 to other parables and ask yourself why did the 72 disciple left Jesus and did not return to him after he told them, that they must eat his flesh and drink his blood.

If you read the parables of Jesus, like the seed, he explains it and he tells them about the symbolic meaning.

It is in only in John 6 that Jesus keep insisting, unless you EAT the flesh of the Son of Man, you shall have no life in you."

This is pretty clear. I read John 6 discourse many times, and it does provide the deeper theological meaning of Jesus’ presence in the Eucharist.
 
Jesus claims to be a door, a vine, a gate, bread, etc… The NT is rich with symbolism. Would you disagree?

-Tim
Okay, so how do you explain the fact that he allowed all of those people to walk away when they believed that what He actually meant was that it was His actual body and blood. And why did He than turn to the apostles and ask them if they too would leave.

I would think that if He meant for it to only be a symbol than He would of told that those who thought other wise.
 
I also like to add, that St. Ignatius was not mislead when he called the Eucharist the “Body and Blood of the Lord.” If he was in error truly the Church would say something against it. From what I read in Church history, that there is no proof text to prove the symbolism of the Eucharist.

All of the ECF are in agreement that the Eucharist is Jesus. St. Ignatius said it, St. Polycarp, St. Ireneaus.
 
As a convert, the easiest doctrine for me to understand and accept with my whole heart and mind was that of the Holy Eucharist.

After all, If God can create an entire universe from NOTHING, and fashion man from the dirt of the earth, why would it be so hard to believe that God can also literally become present to us in the Eucharist hidden behind the signs of bread and wine?

Tonite I will attend our parish’s Reconciliation Service so I may be worthy to receive my Lord in the Eucharist. what a gift God has given all His children.👍
 
Your view simply in no way corresponds to reality. There is never a required ritual to be saved.
“God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledgea] of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.” (1 Peter 3:20-22)
 
Jesus claims to be a door, a vine, a gate, bread, etc… The NT is rich with symbolism. Would you disagree?

-Tim
Nope.

However, no one abandoned Jesus for this symbolism.

They abandoned him precisely because they realized he was speaking literally about his flesh.
 
There are many views on the dating of the gospels (John not being written until AD 95 is usually reserved for atheists with an agenda). I believe the best evidence is for the completion (writing) of the NT prior to AD 70.
Well, since the dates of the books of the N.T. themselves aren’t in Scripture, any belief as to the date at which they were written is based on tradition. I’d just like to make that clear. Could you cite some evidence for the date of completion you believe is correct?
So far we have 4 people in the second century and 4 people in the third century with ignatius acknowleging dissent. Does 8 people during two centuries make a tradition?
They weren’t random people, they were bishops and church elders. They were the people in the teaching positions of the Church. And since they did have Scripture alongside them, why would they be teaching doctrine contrary to Scripture? That was precisely what they accused heretics of doing.

You ask if 8 people over two centuries provide enough basis for a tradition. What weight could the 12 Apostles over only a few decades have had? Or Paul, for that matter?
 
That’s a personal problem Linkowski. The Lord Jesus Christ isn’t dead.

Don’t come in here and try to distract someone who is seeking truth with an open heart with your hate speech and anecdotal misdirection.

Is your own faith so tepid and uninspiring that you must seek out others and attempt to break them down in order to add meaning to your own beliefs?
I had no idea that a cermony could be Christ:confused: …this is not scriptural and it would be very difficult for you to prove this from scripture.
 
1 And on the first day of the week(Sunday), very early in the morning, they came to the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared. 2 And they found the stone rolled back from the sepulchre. 3 And going in, they found not the body of the Lord Jesus. 4 And it came to pass, as they were astonished in their mind at this, behold, two men stood by them, in shining apparel. 5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their countenance towards the ground, they said unto them: Why seek you the living with the dead?

6 He is not here, but is risen. Remember how he spoke unto you, when he was in Galilee, 7 Saying: The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. 8 And they remembered his words. 9 And going back from the sepulchre, they told all these things to the eleven, and to all the rest. 10 And it was Mary Magdalen, and Joanna, and Mary of James, and the other women that were with them, who told these things to the apostles.

11 And these words seemed to them as idle tales; and they did not believe them. 12 But Peter rising up, ran to the sepulchre, and stooping down, he saw the linen cloths laid by themselves; and went away wondering in himself at that which was come to pass. 13 And behold, two of them went, the same day, to a town which was sixty furlongs from Jerusalem, named Emmaus. 14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened. 15 And it came to pass, that while they talked and reasoned with themselves, Jesus himself also drawing near, went with them.

16 But their eyes were held, that they should not know him. 17 And he said to them: What are these discourses that you hold one with another as you walk, and are sad? 18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleophas, answering, said to him: Art thou only a stranger to Jerusalem, and hast not known the things that have been done there in these days? 19 To whom he said: What things? And they said: Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, who was a prophet, mighty in work and word before God and all the people; 20 And how our chief priests and princes delivered him to be condemned to death, and crucified him.

21 But we hoped, that it was he that should have redeemed Israel: and now besides all this, today is the third day since these things were done. 22 Yea and certain women also of our company affrighted us, who before it was light, were at the sepulchre, 23 And not finding his body, came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, who say that he is alive. 24 And some of our people went to the sepulchre, and found it so as the women had said, but him they found not. 25 Then he said to them: O foolish, and slow of heart to believe in all things which the prophets have spoken.

26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and so to enter into his glory? 27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded to them in all the scriptures, the things that were concerning him. 28 And they drew night to the town, whither they were going: and he made as though he would go farther. 29 But they constrained him; saying: Stay with us, because it is towards evening, and the day is now far spent. And he went in with them. 30 And it came to pass, whilst he was at table with them,** he took bread, and blessed, and brake, and gave to them.**

31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him: and he vanished out of their sight. 32 And they said one to the other: Was not our heart burning within us, whilst he spoke in this way, and opened to us the scriptures? 33 And rising up, the same hour, they went back to Jerusalem: and they found the eleven gathered together, and those that were staying with them, 34 Saying: The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 35 And they told what things were done in the way; and how they knew him in the breaking of the bread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top