The Eucharist - Consubstantiation? Symbolic? I don't think so

  • Thread starter Thread starter NotWorthy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Teflon93 said:
Rightlydivide;4455546:
It is not consecrated, Protestant ministers not possessing valid Holy Orders. It is bread.

But the reason my wife and I had to leave a “dedication ceremony” at our friend’s Pentecostal Church of God service when they made to hand out the bread and grape juice—which the pastor actually referred to as the Eucharist, believe it or not----is that it was a mockery of Communion. Unintentional, surely, but a mockery all the same.
Click to expand...
Maybe he was a former Catholic.
I do not believe you own the Lords Supper. He gave us his book to read. We attempt to follow what he teaches. If you view other perspectives as a mockery, I personally think that is a little sensitive and conceited. Not everything is about you guys.
Click to expand...
 
NotWorthy said:
That is the most accurate statement made on this thread. And it makes sense because it is inconceivable for us to think that it is just symbolic. To understand what you are talking about is foreign to me.
Click to expand...
Interesting. But YOU DO think our bread is symbolic because we do not have the capacity to make it otherwise.
 
Rightlydivide said:
Interesting. But YOU DO think our bread is symbolic because we do not have the capacity to make it otherwise.
Click to expand...
Well, now that you mention it, I believe your whole worship service is akin to Dan and Bethel in the Old Testament, after Jeroboam decided that his faithful shouldn’t go to Jerusalem.

So, rather than being symbolic, I believe its false.

Sorry, but you asked.
 
NotWorthy said:
Well, now that you mention it, I believe your whole worship service is akin to Dan and Bethel in the Old Testament, after Jeroboam decided that his faithful shouldn’t go to Jerusalem.

So, rather than being symbolic, I believe its false.

Sorry, but you asked.
Click to expand...
No no problem at all. The feeling is mutual of course. But we already knew that.
We just all try to be nice to each other about it.
 
Rightlydivide said:
No no problem at all. The feeling is mutual of course. But we already knew that.
We just all try to be nice to each other about it.
Click to expand...
Just please be aware.

Although the worship service was false, the faithful were only doing what they thought they were supposed to.

That’s how I’m able to still honestly think of you as a brother in Christ!
 
NotWorthy said:
Just please be aware.

Although the worship service was false, the faithful were only doing what they thought were supposed to. That’s how I’m able to still think of you as a brother in Christ!
Click to expand...
I always assume the good intentions of others unless I have a darn good reason not to.
 
Rightlydivide said:
Teflon93;4455600:
Maybe he was a former Catholic.
I do not believe you own the Lords Supper. He gave us his book to read. We attempt to follow what he teaches. If you view other perspectives as a mockery, I personally think that is a little sensitive and conceited. Not everything is about you guys.
Click to expand...
Nope—he is the son of a Pentecostal pastor and a pastor himself.

It is not about us at all, but about Christ.

You would act quite differently if you truly believed what the Bible has to say on this, which may be found in John 6 and which the ECF testimony unanimously supports.

I have tried to make this easier for you to understand by analogy. I suspect that if you saw me toss a Bible in the trash you would not find me to be very Christian.
Click to expand...
 
Teflon93 said:
Rightlydivide;4455630:
Nope—he is the son of a Pentecostal pastor and a pastor himself.

It is not about us at all, but about Christ.

You would act quite differently if you truly believed what the Bible has to say on this, which may be found in John 6 and which the ECF testimony unanimously supports.

I have tried to make this easier for you to understand by analogy. I suspect that if you saw me toss a Bible in the trash you would not find me to be very Christian.
Click to expand...
I do believe the Bible. You really have a hard time when someone thinks differently than you. And I am the fundamentalist here!!
I understand your analogy, I think it is a false analogy due to a faulty premise. Do not assume I do not understand, assume I simply disagree.
Once again, a Bible can sit on a shelf. A loaf of bread either goes to the trash or sewer. Not a third option.
Click to expand...
 
NotWorthy said:
Love the sinner, hate the sin?

Or, more appropriately, love the false worshiper, hate the false worship? 😉
Click to expand...
Oh sure. A good Catholic and I are a lot more alike than a liberal Protestant. I think anyway. I am not around your worship a lot and do not think about it much. I really only like the historical conversations around here but this one grabbed my attention.
 
Rightlydivide said:
Oh sure. A good Catholic and I are a lot more alike than a liberal Protestant. I think anyway. I am not around your worship a lot and do not think about it much. I really only like the historical conversations around here but this one grabbed my attention.
Click to expand...
Well, I hope you have a lot more to offer on the historical conversations than simply “St. Ireneaus re-wrote history”! 🙂
 
NotWorthy said:
Well, I hope you have a lot more to offer on the historical conversations than simply “St. Ireneaus re-wrote history”! 🙂
Click to expand...
Most of his book is not historical in that sense as you know, it is theologically based and his arguments against the gnostic sects are a subject in and of themselves. But his basic premise is the line of bishops come from two men. Peter and Paul. He considers them a whole. Not just one. Peter is not the reason for this line, it is two men. You are also aware that I do not know of very many books that consider these lines of bishops to be historical. I am not sure what book is used in Catholic seminaries but I would be shocked if it supported a monarchial bishop. AND Peter and Paul DID NOT found the church at Rome.
 
Teflon93 said:
Rightlydivide;4455630:
Nope—he is the son of a Pentecostal pastor and a pastor himself.

It is not about us at all, but about Christ.

You would act quite differently if you truly believed what the Bible has to say on this, which may be found in John 6 and which the ECF testimony unanimously supports.

I have tried to make this easier for you to understand by analogy. I suspect that if you saw me toss a Bible in the trash you would not find me to be very Christian.
Click to expand...
I suspect it when I see people worshipping and adoring bread and wine. 🤷
Click to expand...
 
Rightlydivide said:
Teflon93;4455710:
I do believe the Bible. You really have a hard time when someone thinks differently than you. And I am the fundamentalist here!!
I understand your analogy, I think it is a false analogy due to a faulty premise. Do not assume I do not understand, assume I simply disagree.
Once again, a Bible can sit on a shelf. A loaf of bread either goes to the trash or sewer. Not a third option.
Click to expand...
Okay, 3rd try:

If you saw me toss a Bible in the trash, your reaction would be…
Click to expand...
 
Rightlydivide said:
Oh sure. A good Catholic and I are a lot more alike than a liberal Protestant. I think anyway. I am not around your worship a lot and do not think about it much. I really only like the historical conversations around here but this one grabbed my attention.
Click to expand...
Rightlydivide, I’ve read through most of this thread and I have to wonder.If you were present at the Last Supper when Jesus said," This is my body" would you have jumped up and said, No it’s not! ??

When the Jews found Jesus’ words hard to accept in John 6:66 and decided to leave, why would Jesus’ disciples find it so hard to accept a symbolic meal? Did they not react because they thought that Jesus truly meant that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood? And if this were so, why would Jesus not only let them leave on a misunderstanding but then turn to the remaining twelve and ask them if they’d like to leave as well?

Just curious… Oh and ,by the way, the word Bible is not in the Bible. I kept looking but I simply cannot find it in there anywhere. Why do you call the Scriptures “the Bible” when nowhere in there does it say to do this?? This is not an off topic request. It just reminds you that selectively you use what the Church teaches. Now, back to the Eucharist…teachccd
 
teachccd said:
Rightlydivide, I’ve read through most of this thread and I have to wonder.If you were present at the Last Supper when Jesus said," This is my body" would you have jumped up and said, No it’s not! ??

When the Jews found Jesus’ words hard to accept in John 6:66 and decided to leave, why would Jesus’ disciples find it so hard to accept a symbolic meal? Did they not react because they thought that Jesus truly meant that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood? And if this were so, why would Jesus not only let them leave on a misunderstanding but then turn to the remaining twelve and ask them if they’d like to leave as well?

Just curious… Oh and ,by the way, the word Bible is not in the Bible. I kept looking but I simply cannot find it in there anywhere. Why do you call the Scriptures “the Bible” when nowhere in there does it say to do this?? This is not an off topic request. It just reminds you that selectively you use what the Church teaches. Now, back to the Eucharist…teachccd
Click to expand...
Jhn 6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard [this], said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [What] and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
Click to expand...
Code: 
Some of the disciples do not grasp what he is saying. Christ’s words about ascending up to heaven, “where he was before”, seem to hint at the audience’s fixation with his saying “he came down from heaven”.  Perhaps he senses they are still murmuring about that.
Unfortunately, this is where you quit reading the text because Christ gives the most specific and concise summary of what he just said next:
Jhn 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life. But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Click to expand...
Code: 
It is self-explanatory after reading this.  The words are “spirit”!  Christ, in his wisdom, even throws in that “some of you that believe not”.  He does not say, “Some of you do not understand” as Catholic apologists like to say was the case.   Christ knew “from the beginning” who did not believe!
Jhn 6:66 From that [time] many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Click to expand...
They left because they “believe not”. There is nothing that indicates they left because they did not comprehend the message.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top