No Real Presence of Jesus Christ in Protestant Churches

[Randy_Carson]

now maybe it is time for you to take a closer look at history. The concept of Real Presence has always been tricky one, one that the Catholic Church has had to defend, “prove” and go to great lengths to explain, and get into the heads of the people.

It is still so.

And has been from the beginning.

“This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”

However, Jesus did not pander to the crowd by saying, “Hey, c’mon back, folks. I was speaking metaphorically.” :nope:

They left him because they could not accept his teaching. It is still so.

It is beyond ridiculous to suggest that the concept was never questioned,and was accepted, believed and automatic to every Christian until Luther came along.

Every Christian?

Maybe not. But the Church continues to proclaim the truth whether people accept it or not.

The Catholic Church has always, and still has a heck of a time getting it’s own to grasp and take the concept seriously…at least if these forums, and a look at the history of councils, teachings, and traditions are to be believed.

She has a hard time getting people to accept the resurrection, too. Some believe and some don’t.

I read it here all the time, Catholics speaking about Catholics, how people don’t respect the Eucharist as the Real Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. They show it with their words, actions, manner of dress, lack of respect for the “rules” reguarding receiving, etc.

Their lack of faith does not diminish the truth of the teaching, however.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

Why do you then have to re-receive him at every mass. Does he leave you so often?

Because the Eucharist, like all sacraments, is a channel of grace.

Jesus said, “My flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink.”

We eat and drink often to sustain ourselves on the journey.

Were you asking in sincerity or just being facetious?

 

[Efrain]

It is beyond ridiculous to suggest that the concept was never questioned,and was accepted, believed and automatic to every Christian until Luther came along.

Luther = nominalist.

 

[Randy_Carson]

That didnt answer the question.

The assumption was that Jesus leaves us and that we have to receive him again.

If this foolishness were true, then you should ask yourselves why you receive communion four times a year )or whatever the frequency of your own ecclesial community happens to be).

IOW, have you attended a “communion service” more than once in your life?

If so, why? Did Jesus leave YOU and you had to receive him again?

MY rhetorical questions are a stupid as the one originally posted.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[GKC]

Dear Cheddarsox,

are you avoiding answering my question?

You made the accusation that what I stated was “ridicuous”

Please back this up and tell me which Christians denied it prior to the Reformation?

Well, Ratramnus and Berengarius each got into a little controversy over the definitions.

Don’t get the wrong idea. I’m Anglican; I think Trent, Session XIII got it right. But what I read Cheddarsox as saying is historically correct. The idea of the Real Presence has been a complicated one.

GKC

 

[Randy_Carson]

I have experienced the true grace from our Lord Jesus and it doesn’t come from Mary or the authority of Rome.

Of course not.

At least this much of what you wrote is correct.

 

[Randy_Carson]

No thanks, you can keep all of your rhetoric that I listened to for 34 years as it got me nowhere in the spirit. The Catholic church has become a legend in its own mind. The “we have it and you don’t” attitude isn’t helpful to anyone and it is surely not endorsed by our Lord Christ. As far as being home, I am home now in the Anglican church, where I truly have found Jesus and have been healed by the Holy Spirit and where I can worship God with the body of Christ.

Should we review the founding of the Anglican Church?

Henry VIII is always a great topic of discussion…

Alleluia, Christ the passover has sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, Alleluia

Amen!

What feast do you suppose Paul was speaking of?

 

[estesbob]

Thanks. I cant really answer why they stepped away. I could could guess and say they found no biblical support for transubstantiation. I wasnt there back then. I was never raised in that belief so I havent walked away from it. I never had it to begin with. Since I do not believe in trasubstantiation, I do not feel the same way you do.

So for 1,500 year Christians followed Jeses’s clear intrsuctions and suddenly “men:” decided he didnt mean what he said? How could God have let his Church exist in such monumemtal error for 1,500 years?

 

[estesbob]

The assumption was that Jesus leaves us and that we have to receive him again.

If this foolishness were true, then you should ask yourselves why you receive communion four times a year )or whatever the frequency of your own ecclesial community happens to be).

IOW, have you attended a “communion service” more than once in your life?

If so, why? Did Jesus leave YOU and you had to receive him again?

MY rhetorical questions are a stupid as the one originally posted.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

I have not read one person claim Jesus leaves us. You have built a marvelous Strawman and are now patting yourslef in the back as you repeatedly knock it over. I suggest you dwell on the difference between “Spiritual Presence” and “Physical Pesence” You have settled for half of that. One mises a lot when they follow man made religions.

 

[estesbob]

Maybe you should read a little more closely. I was a Catholic, that was my vantage point. I left because of the unholy pride on the INSIDE.

No one seduced me away, or told me ugly things about Catholicism. I experienced the things as an insider, and fled them.

I don’t go around attacking or bashing Catholicism, or trying to lure people away.

But, when asked, I do give my opionion, based on my experience.

cheddar

Sounds like you belonged to a Catholic Church none of us who still belong recognize. To say you were were poorly catechized would be an understatement.

 

[Randy_Carson]

It absolutely breaks my heart to think that in order to feel Jesus’ presence you have to eat bread and drink wine… “Whenever two or more are gathered in my name…”

You suggest a dichotomy where none exists.

Of course, Jesus can be present to you in prayer, through scripture, in the love of others, etc.

However, he also gave us his body and blood and real food and drink. Why?

Why did Jesus tell us to “do this in remembrance of me”? Was he afraid that people were going to forget him?

He didn’t say “remember me” while he was hanging on the cross, did he? It would seem like that would be the most important thing we should remember, right? “For God so loved the world…” kinda points to his death, so the cross should be what we “remember”.

Yet, he actually said “do this”?" Why? What is so important about breaking some bread and drinking some wine that Jesus commanded it be done?

Must be pretty important whatever it is…

The Church didn’t just dream this stuff up; she’s being obedient to God.

Hope this helps.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Thanks. I cant really answer why they stepped away. I could could guess and say they found no biblical support for transubstantiation. I wasnt there back then. I was never raised in that belief so I havent walked away from it. I never had it to begin with. Since I do not believe in trasubstantiation, I do not feel the same way you do.

Transubstantiation is a technical term used to describe what the Bible says happens when the bread and wine are consecrated.

Similarly, you won’t find the terms “trinity” or “hypostatic union” in scripture, either.

But you believe the the doctrines, nonetheless.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

Thanks for the example. I guess since I have Jesus inside me (via the HS ) I do not feel the need to have to touch him etc. All I do is ask for His comfort and love and He delivers.

However, he obviously understands that you have a deeper need. Hence, He instituted of the Eucharist.

It was HIS idea, not ours.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I agree with your profound statement. I have a real concern that the church has it “right” and everyone else is wrong. God cannot be put in a box. It seems to me, personally, that the church has moved from the heart of Christian teaching to the “Letter of the Law”. I would think St. Francis would be rolling in his grave.
The “humility” of the Church appears absent and has been replaced with arrogance. We,as the people of God,need Mercy.
God Bless,
Joe

Joe-

I’m sorry you feel this way, but I would like to ask: when was the last time you actually sat down and read a papal encyclical cover to cover?

I don’t hear the arrogance you’re speaking of from the Holy Father…

 

[johnstown_johnn]

Jesus declared wherever two or more are gathered in my Name, there am I. So yes, in that sense, He is spiritually present whenever his followers of any denomination gather to praise and worship him and invoke His Name. He is present in their midst in their fellowship with one another, and in the charity they show to others. He is present in their obedience to his commandments. He is present in the proclamation of the Word because He is the Word. He is sacramentally present, however, Body Blood Soul and Divinity only within the Eucharist in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass celebrated by a validly ordained priest of either the CAtholic or Orthodox Church. I have no doubt that he honors and hears the prayers of those denominations who gather for the purpose of a memorial celebration of the Lord’s Supper, even though this action is merely a recollection of, not a participation in, the Last Supper and the Sacrifice of Calvary. But no, however much he may be present spiritually he is not and cannot be present to them sacramentally because he himself has said so, and defined how that Presence is to be made real.

“…he who eats My Body and drinks My Blood shall never die…”

That is so profound !

 

[estesbob]

However, he obviously understands that you have a deeper need. Hence, He instituted of the Eucharist.

It was HIS idea, not ours.

Knida like the difference between talking to yor Mother on the phone today or actually being with her. Is anyone going to claim the former is as good as the latter?

 

[Hellisreal]

If it were symbolic why are we warned that we would be drinking a cup of judgement upon ourselves if we took unworthily?

 

[Randy_Carson]

John 6 has nothing to do with the Last Supper. It has everything to do with belief in Christ. The Last Supper wasnt instituted until later.

Jesus said:

13No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.a] 14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life." (John 3:14-15)

So, you see, Allforhim, that Jesus spoke of his death in veiled terms long before His passion began.

Likewise, He spoke of His body and blood in John 6 long before He instituted the Eucharist at the Last Supper .

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[johnstown_johnn]

You suggest a dichotomy where none exists.

Of course, Jesus can be present to you in prayer, through scripture, in the love of others, etc.

However, he also gave us his body and blood and real food and drink. Why?

Why did Jesus tell us to “do this in remembrance of me”? Was he afraid that people were going to forget him?

He didn’t say “remember me” while he was hanging on the cross, did he? It would seem like that would be the most important thing we should remember, right? “For God so loved the world…” kinda points to his death, so the cross should be what we “remember”.

Yet, he actually said “do this”?" Why? What is so important about breaking some bread and drinking some wine that Jesus commanded it be done?

Must be pretty important whatever it is…

The Church didn’t just dream this stuff up; she’s being obedient to God.

Hope this helps.

“…remember…” is another term for “commemoration of Me.” However, the most important words that preceeded " rememberance/commemoration"

He said, “DO THIS IN remembrance/commemoration of Me”
He was instituting His UNBLOODY sacrifice of the Mass so generations may have their sins forgiven. It wasn’t so that He should not be forgotten.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Maybe you should read a little more closely. I was a Catholic, that was my vantage point. I left because of the unholy pride on the INSIDE.

No one seduced me away, or told me ugly things about Catholicism. I experienced the things as an insider, and fled them.

I don’t go around attacking or bashing Catholicism, or trying to lure people away.

But, when asked, I do give my opionion, based on my experience.

cheddar

I read your post carefully. You were unhappy with the way some people were acting. That’s understandable.

Scandalous behavior is a problem. Wouldn’t it have been more appropriate for you to remain and encourage your brothers and sisters to live properly?

Jesus instructed you as follows:

13"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.
14"You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. 15Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house.

It kinda sounds like you took your lamp and went elsewhere.