How do protestants explain the time between Christ and the reformation?

[HopkinsReb]

Padres1969:

Grape Juice being a symbol of wine does not equate to the Eucharist being a symbol for body and blood.

Grape juice might be a symbol of the wine. The wine once consecrated, on the other hand, is the blood of Christ.

I was under the impression that the Lutheran position is that the wine, once concentrated, remains the wine but contains the blood of Christ. Am I mistaken?

 

[Padres1969]

Exactly. I think he was making the mistake of assuming that because the pastor mentioned grape juice being a symbol for wine that the entire Eucharist was symbolic.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Padres1969:

Grape Juice being a symbol of wine does not equate to the Eucharist being a symbol for body and blood.

Grape juice might be a symbol of the wine. The wine once consecrated, on the other hand, is the blood of Christ.

I was under the impression that the Lutheran position is that the wine, once concentrated, remains the wine but contains the blood of Christ. Am I mistaken?

That would be consubstantiation, a teaching rejected entirely by Lutherans since Gerhard, Chemnitz, and Luther

 

[HopkinsReb]

HopkinsReb:

JonNC:

Padres1969:

Grape Juice being a symbol of wine does not equate to the Eucharist being a symbol for body and blood.

Grape juice might be a symbol of the wine. The wine once consecrated, on the other hand, is the blood of Christ.

I was under the impression that the Lutheran position is that the wine, once concentrated, remains the wine but contains the blood of Christ. Am I mistaken?

That would be consubstantiation, a teaching rejected entirely by Lutherans since Gerhard

I’m still confused – Lutherans reject transubstantiation, but still believe that the wine becomes the blood of Christ and the wine does not remain?

 

[GKMotley]

Popcorn eating emoticon, here.

 

[Hodos]

Are you asking what the Holy Spirit actually does, or what Protestants believe?

I was under the impression that the Lutheran position is that the wine, once concentrated, remains the wine but contains the blood of Christ. Am I mistaken?

Luther doesn’t try to answer this question. He recognizes that the apostles when referring to the Sacrament of Holy Communion refer to both the bread and the wine, and the body and the blood. We accept that in communion we receive the body and blood of Christ based on Christ’s promise in with and under the bread and wine. How that happens we don’t need to speculate. We just receive what Christ has given us.

 

[HopkinsReb]

in with and under the bread and wine.

In your explanation, there is bread and wine involved. @JonNC said that it is no longer bread and wine. So now I’m quite confused on what the Lutheran position actually is.

 

[Hodos]

That is because you are trying to answer the question which scripture nor Lutherans attempt to answer.

From the Small Catechism:

What is the Sacrament of the Alter?

It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, under the bread and wine, for us Christians to eat and to drink, instituted by Christ himself.

 

[HopkinsReb]

That is because you are trying to answer the question which scripture nor Lutherans attempt to answer.

Then take that up with @JonNC, because he said, or at least strongly implied, earlier in this thread that the bread and wine do not remain.

 

[Wannano]

Exactly. I think he was making the mistake of assuming that because the pastor mentioned grape juice being a symbol for wine that the entire Eucharist was symbolic.

I never meant to give the impression that the entire Eucharist was symbolic. What I said was that there was no direct reference made to the Real Presence. The invitation to join in Communion did not have any conditions on it of believing in the Real Presence. He just made the statement that they use grape juice as a symbol of wine. He may have intended to indirectly address the Real Presence when he said in the final invitation " come and receive the body and blood of Christ". However, we hear those same words at my church which does not make a distinction about the Real Presence but rather treats Communion as containing a special presence in a symbolic action.

 

[Hodos]

No, not really. John rejected consubstantiation and he rejected transubstantiation. What he didn’t do is explain how the sacrament works except to say that we do in fact receive the body and blood of Christ in accordance with Christ’s words of institution.

 

[HopkinsReb]

No, not really. John rejected consubstantiation and he rejected transubstantiation. What he didn’t do is explain how the sacrament works except to say that we do in fact receive the body and blood of Christ in accordance with Christ’s words of institution.

Fair enough. I do think I read too much into his post.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

HopkinsReb:

JonNC:

Padres1969:

Grape Juice being a symbol of wine does not equate to the Eucharist being a symbol for body and blood.

Grape juice might be a symbol of the wine. The wine once consecrated, on the other hand, is the blood of Christ.

I was under the impression that the Lutheran position is that the wine, once concentrated, remains the wine but contains the blood of Christ. Am I mistaken?

That would be consubstantiation, a teaching rejected entirely by Lutherans since Gerhard

I’m still confused – Lutherans reject transubstantiation, but still believe that the wine becomes the blood of Christ and the wine does not remain?

Lutherans reject the metaphysical descriptions. In short, the words of Christ suffice: This is my body. It is a mystery, not explained by Christ.
As John of Damascus wrote:

The body which is born of the holy Virgin is in truth body united with divinity, not that the body which was received up into the heavens descends, but that the bread itself and the wine are changed into God’s body and blood. But if you enquire how this happens, it is enough for you to learn that it was through the Holy Spirit, just as the Lord took on himself flesh that subsisted in him and was born of the holy Mother of God through the Spirit.

The bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ.

 

[JonNC]

Hodos:

in with and under the bread and wine.

In your explanation, there is bread and wine involved. @JonNC said that it is no longer bread and wine. So now I’m quite confused on what the Lutheran position actually is.

Actually, I didn’t say that.

 

[Padres1969]

Ah, well that may be more of a case of the same words (body and blood) having different meaning for different branches of Christianity. I mean the Catholic Eucharistic rite doesn’t utilize the words real presence or transubstantiation either yet it’s implied.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

He thinks he is saving their souls…well, the ones who stay and put up with their bullying and constant suspensions.

 

[Padres1969]

I’ve seen the same mentality in street preachers in SoCal. It’s not pretty. “Im going to save all your souls, but to hell with you!”

 

[lilypadrees]

Yeah, Matt Slick not Jesus is saving Catholic souls. I have news for him. Jesus is the only one saving my soul.

 

[Gingersnaps4]

The first 1500 years aren’t really open for discussion in the heavily southern baptist OSAS area I live in. Here people believe all of the absurd anti-Catholic rhetoric and when asked about things like the real presence or other catholic practices, and ancient writings that mention these subjects…they would say that they think that the apostles and those taught by the apostles somehow got it wrong, or that what is written isnt what was meant. There is a push to only believe their newer translations of scripture as well, and not look at the translations from the original languages. They mostly go out of their way to NOT learn about that time period so that they can stay comfortable where they are. I know I’ve painted an unflattering picture but my area is full of people that think we worship Mary and the pope is the antichrist

 

[dochawk]

People exist – baptists, who honestly think their denomination was started by John the Baptist. You cant make this stuff up.

as a sidenote, there is an ancient religion, whose name I can’t recall, of followers of John the Baptist who didn’t accept Christ. They’re still around, but there aren’t very many of them.

and explained that they use grape juice as a symbol of wine.

So in their world, it’s a symbol of a symbol?

Perhaps you could just mimic drinking it, to add a third level of symbology?

:shudder: