Unless you eat my FLESH and drink my BLOOD you have no life in you.

  • Thread starter Thread starter donnyblake
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Donny, let’s let St. Augustine weigh in on the subject:
Chapter 16.—Rule for Interpreting Commands and Prohibitions.
24. “If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,” says Christ, “and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” John 6:53 This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.
This quote is taken from Augustine’s “On Christian Doctrine” Book 3, Chapter 16, easily found at Newadvent.org. While you’re at the web site, you may wish to peruse Augustine’s commentary of the Bread of Life discourse, specifically Tractates 25, 26 & 27. You wil find highly instructive quotes by Augustine, such as “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” This is then to eat the meat, not that which perishes, but that which endures unto eternal life. To what purpose do you make ready teeth and stomach? Believe, and you have eaten already. Faith is indeed distinguished from works, even as the apostle says, “that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law:” Romans 3:28” , and “Wherefore, the Lord, about to give the Holy Spirit, said that Himself was the bread that came down from heaven, exhorting us to believe in Him. For to believe in Him is to eat the living bread. He that believes eats; he is sated invisibly, because invisibly is he born again. A babe within, a new man within. Where he is made new, there he is satisfied with food”. He also says, " “This, then, is the bread that comes down from heaven, that if any man eat thereof, he shall not die.” But this is what belongs to the virtue of the sacrament, not to the visible sacrament; he that eats within, not without; who eats in his heart, not who presses with his teeth." and " In a word, He now explains how that which He speaks of comes to pass, and what it is to eat His body and to drink His blood. “He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in him.” This it is, therefore, for a man to eat that meat and to drink that drink, to dwell in Christ, and to have Christ dwelling in him. Consequently, he that dwells not in Christ, and in whom Christ dwells not, doubtless neither eats His flesh [spiritually] nor drinks His blood [although he may press the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ carnally and visibly with his teeth]," or, “just as we are made better by participation of the Son, through the unity of His body and blood, which thing that eating and drinking signifies. We live then by Him, by eating Him; that is, by receiving Himself as the eternal life” and “The Lord gives us His flesh to eat, and yet to understand it according to the flesh is death; while yet He says of His flesh, that therein is eternal life. Therefore we ought not to understand the flesh carnally”. In Tractate 27.3 Augustine continues, " “This offends you;” because I said, I give you my flesh to eat, and my blood to drink, this forsooth offends you. “Then what if you shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before?” What is this? Did He hereby solve the question that perplexed them? Did He hereby uncover the source of their offense? He did clearly, if only they understood. For they supposed that He was going to deal out His body to them; but He said that He was to ascend into heaven, of course, whole: “When you shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before;” certainly then, at least, you will see that not in the manner you suppose does He dispense His body; certainly then, at least, you will understand that His grace is not consumed by tooth-biting".
The 3 Tractates are quite a bit of reading, but are also quite informative.
 
How can Protestants ignore this command from Jesus? Many Perotestant churchs don’t even celebrate the Eucharist symbolically more than a few times a year,or maybe once a month. Just how far from the One True Faith have many Protestant sects gotten? How does this happen? Any thoughts? Thanks.
Personally I love Communion (Eucharisto) and it not only reminds me of what my Lord did for me but also make me keenly aware of His presence. I do wish we celebrated it more than once a month in my Church. And I do think perhaps Catholics may do this better than us, but the only thing I would be wary of is in taking the elements with unconfessed sin. This is a sacred thing. And just because you celebrate it more often it the right posture before the Lord that really counts. So I believe it is the quality of the experience that surpasses the quantity of the experience.

May God Bless, pat 🙂
 
Personally I love Communion (Eucharisto) and it not only reminds me of what my Lord did for me but also make me keenly aware of His presence. I do wish we celebrated it more than once a month in my Church. And I do think perhaps Catholics may do this better than us, but the only thing I would be wary of is in taking the elements with unconfessed sin. This is a sacred thing. And just because you celebrate it more often it the right posture before the Lord that really counts. So I believe it is the quality of the experience that surpasses the quantity of the experience.

May God Bless, pat
It’s not just a communal meal though. I don’t know if this is what you’re having.

St Paul said this in 1 Corinthians 11:17 ff
 
Forgive me, Mike, for taking a wrong inference. The only way God’s truth is conveyed, Mike, is not by your persuasion, but by the working of the Spirit; the Spirit took me out of your church years ago.
And the Spirit has led others to the Catholic Church. 🙂

God Bless,
Michael
 
No, no ambiguity, therefore no misunderstanding, therefore no correction.

As for this construction, see above. In Apostolic times no one who believed did not also commune, and none that disbelieved communed.

Again, this only reinforces that He is speakers to believers, not those who turned there backs because it was a hard saying. It is addressed to those who said ‘where would we go.’

If there was any ambiguity/misunderstanding that it was literal, as the OP showed, St. John would have corrected it. He didn’t, because it was understood liteally. It is also why He never recounts the Last Supper, but expounds on its import in John 6.
:amen:

Eating the body and blood of Christ reinforces a bond already created through faith. Hence, only those who have faith can partake of the Eucharist. As Jesus states, those who eat His flesh and drink His blood abide in Him and those who abide in Christ are assured salvation because they remain connected to the life-giving Vine that is Christ (John 15) Through the Eucharist, we commune with Christ and grow in our relationship with Him.

God Bless,
Michael
 
sandusky;2627544 said:
Ignore!? :rolleyes: I’ll give you credit that when you do respond, you give good responses. Wrong, but thoughtful. 😃 But you should not accuse me of ignoring, particularly when you have a history of it as well.

God Bless,
Michael
 
Jesus is the ULTIMATE and pure sacrifice. That is why we do not need to offer burnt offerings to God any longer because Jesus paid that price FOR us. You quoted out of the Old Testament which would mean that they still made offerings to God. Since Jesus that is no longer needed since Jesus paid that price. 👍
Do you believe that Jesus lacks the power and authority to give us His Body and Blood under the appearance of bread and wine? Surely you would admit that Jesus could do this, if he willed it. Would you agree that the Christians who were alive during the time of the apostles, or soon thereafter, would be the ones who would have had the most chance to “get it right?” If you want the truth, read the historical documents of the early Christians. There are letters and apologies from that very early period that have survived.It is a matter of historical fact that the early Christians believed in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist
 
Singinbeauty, how then would you respond to St. Augustine, given these previously referenced quotes of his?
Chapter 16.—Rule for Interpreting Commands and Prohibitions.
24. “If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,” says Christ, “and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” John 6:53 This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.
This quote is taken from Augustine’s “On Christian Doctrine” Book 3, Chapter 16, easily found at Newadvent.org. While you’re at the web site, you may wish to peruse Augustine’s commentary of the Bread of Life discourse, specifically Tractates 25, 26 & 27. You wil find highly instructive quotes by Augustine, such as “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” This is then to eat the meat, not that which perishes, but that which endures unto eternal life. To what purpose do you make ready teeth and stomach? Believe, and you have eaten already. Faith is indeed distinguished from works, even as the apostle says, “that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law:” Romans 3:28” , and “Wherefore, the Lord, about to give the Holy Spirit, said that Himself was the bread that came down from heaven, exhorting us to believe in Him. For to believe in Him is to eat the living bread. He that believes eats; he is sated invisibly, because invisibly is he born again. A babe within, a new man within. Where he is made new, there he is satisfied with food”. He also says, " “This, then, is the bread that comes down from heaven, that if any man eat thereof, he shall not die.” But this is what belongs to the virtue of the sacrament, not to the visible sacrament; he that eats within, not without; who eats in his heart, not who presses with his teeth." and " In a word, He now explains how that which He speaks of comes to pass, and what it is to eat His body and to drink His blood. “He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in him.” This it is, therefore, for a man to eat that meat and to drink that drink, to dwell in Christ, and to have Christ dwelling in him. Consequently, he that dwells not in Christ, and in whom Christ dwells not, doubtless neither eats His flesh [spiritually] nor drinks His blood [although he may press the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ carnally and visibly with his teeth]," or, “just as we are made better by participation of the Son, through the unity of His body and blood, which thing that eating and drinking signifies. We live then by Him, by eating Him; that is, by receiving Himself as the eternal life” and “The Lord gives us His flesh to eat, and yet to understand it according to the flesh is death; while yet He says of His flesh, that therein is eternal life. Therefore we ought not to understand the flesh carnally”. In Tractate 27.3 Augustine continues, " “This offends you;” because I said, I give you my flesh to eat, and my blood to drink, this forsooth offends you. “Then what if you shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before?” What is this? Did He hereby solve the question that perplexed them? Did He hereby uncover the source of their offense? He did clearly, if only they understood. For they supposed that He was going to deal out His body to them; but He said that He was to ascend into heaven, of course, whole: “When you shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before;” certainly then, at least, you will see that not in the manner you suppose does He dispense His body; certainly then, at least, you will understand that His grace is not consumed by tooth-biting".
 
Singinbeauty, how then would you respond to St. Augustine, given these previously referenced quotes of his?
Chapter 16.—Rule for Interpreting Commands and Prohibitions.
24. “If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,” says Christ, “and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” John 6:53 This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.
This quote is taken from Augustine’s “On Christian Doctrine” Book 3, Chapter 16, easily found at Newadvent.org. While you’re at the web site, you may wish to peruse Augustine’s commentary of the Bread of Life discourse, specifically Tractates 25, 26 & 27. You wil find highly instructive quotes by Augustine, such as “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” This is then to eat the meat, not that which perishes, but that which endures unto eternal life. To what purpose do you make ready teeth and stomach? Believe, and you have eaten already. Faith is indeed distinguished from works, even as the apostle says, “that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law:” Romans 3:28” , and “Wherefore, the Lord, about to give the Holy Spirit, said that Himself was the bread that came down from heaven, exhorting us to believe in Him. For to believe in Him is to eat the living bread. He that believes eats; he is sated invisibly, because invisibly is he born again. A babe within, a new man within. Where he is made new, there he is satisfied with food”. He also says, " “This, then, is the bread that comes down from heaven, that if any man eat thereof, he shall not die.” But this is what belongs to the virtue of the sacrament, not to the visible sacrament; he that eats within, not without; who eats in his heart, not who presses with his teeth." and " In a word, He now explains how that which He speaks of comes to pass, and what it is to eat His body and to drink His blood. “He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in him.” This it is, therefore, for a man to eat that meat and to drink that drink, to dwell in Christ, and to have Christ dwelling in him. Consequently, he that dwells not in Christ, and in whom Christ dwells not, doubtless neither eats His flesh [spiritually] nor drinks His blood [although he may press the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ carnally and visibly with his teeth]," or, “just as we are made better by participation of the Son, through the unity of His body and blood, which thing that eating and drinking signifies. We live then by Him, by eating Him; that is, by receiving Himself as the eternal life” and “The Lord gives us His flesh to eat, and yet to understand it according to the flesh is death; while yet He says of His flesh, that therein is eternal life. Therefore we ought not to understand the flesh carnally”. In Tractate 27.3 Augustine continues, " “This offends you;” because I said, I give you my flesh to eat, and my blood to drink, this forsooth offends you. “Then what if you shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before?” What is this? Did He hereby solve the question that perplexed them? Did He hereby uncover the source of their offense? He did clearly, if only they understood. For they supposed that He was going to deal out His body to them; but He said that He was to ascend into heaven, of course, whole: “When you shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before;” certainly then, at least, you will see that not in the manner you suppose does He dispense His body; certainly then, at least, you will understand that His grace is not consumed by tooth-biting".
I am sorry. I tried to read this but it is way to conveluted and messy. I have dyslexia and all this jumbled together is creating confusion in this poor brain of mine… LOL… I will try to read it again and get back to ya!👍
 
I am sorry. I tried to read this but it is way to conveluted and messy. I have dyslexia and all this jumbled together is creating confusion in this poor brain of mine… LOL… I will try to read it again and get back to ya!👍
I was thinking the same thing… It’s always helpful when paragraphs are used. A single, huge block of text is a little daunting.
 
Sorry, I’m kinda new at this. I hope the clarity is a little better this time around.

Chapter 16.—Rule for Interpreting Commands and Prohibitions.
24. "If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,” says Christ, “and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” John 6:53 This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.

This quote is taken from Augustine’s “On Christian Doctrine” Book 3, Chapter 16, easily found at Newadvent.org. While you’re at the web site, you may wish to peruse Augustine’s commentary of the Bread of Life discourse, specifically Tractates 25, 26 & 27. You wil find highly instructive quotes by St. Augustine, such as:

“This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” This is then to eat the meat, not that which perishes, but that which endures unto eternal life. To what purpose do you make ready teeth and stomach? Believe, and you have eaten already. Faith is indeed distinguished from works, even as the apostle says, “that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law:”.

“Wherefore, the Lord, about to give the Holy Spirit, said that Himself was the bread that came down from heaven, exhorting us to believe in Him. For to believe in Him is to eat the living bread. He that believes eats; he is sated invisibly, because invisibly is he born again. A babe within, a new man within. Where he is made new, there he is satisfied with food”.

St. Augustine also says, " “This, then, is the bread that comes down from heaven, that if any man eat thereof, he shall not die.” But this is what belongs to the virtue of the sacrament, not to the visible sacrament; he that eats within, not without; who eats in his heart, not who presses with his teeth."

“In a word, He now explains how that which He speaks of comes to pass, and what it is to eat His body and to drink His blood. “He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in him.” This it is, therefore, for a man to eat that meat and to drink that drink, to dwell in Christ, and to have Christ dwelling in him. Consequently, he that dwells not in Christ, and in whom Christ dwells not, doubtless neither eats His flesh [spiritually] nor drinks His blood [although he may press the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ carnally and visibly with his teeth],”

“Just as we are made better by participation of the Son, through the unity of His body and blood, which thing that eating and drinking signifies. We live then by Him, by eating Him; that is, by receiving Himself as the eternal life” and “The Lord gives us His flesh to eat, and yet to understand it according to the flesh is death; while yet He says of His flesh, that therein is eternal life. Therefore we ought not to understand the flesh carnally”.

In Tractate 27.3 St. Augustine continues, " “This offends you;” because I said, I give you my flesh to eat, and my blood to drink, this forsooth offends you. “Then what if you shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before?” What is this? Did He hereby solve the question that perplexed them? Did He hereby uncover the source of their offense? He did clearly, if only they understood. For they supposed that He was going to deal out His body to them; but He said that He was to ascend into heaven, of course, whole: “When you shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before;” certainly then, at least, you will see that not in the manner you suppose does He dispense His body; certainly then, at least, you will understand that His grace is not consumed by tooth-biting".

These are just a few of St. Augustines observations from John 6, specfically The Bread of Life discourse. A complete study of his commentary can be made at newadvent.org.
 
Romans828, that whole thing you posted goes against transubstantiation, I take it? Please clarify if I’m wrong but that’s what I got from reading what you posted.
 
Romans828, that whole thing you posted goes against transubstantiation, I take it? Please clarify if I’m wrong but that’s what I got from reading what you posted.
Mrs. Abott,

When I read St. Augustine’s entire commentary on the Bread of Life discourse (found at Newadvent.org, under Church Fathers, Tractates 25-27), I came to the same conclusion as you did. Other early Church Fathers that I have read put forth a similar, figurative understanding of the Bread of Life discourse as well.

Thanks.
 
As Saint Augustine wrote of the Eucharist in Confessions, "I am the food of full-grown men. Grow and you shall feed on me. But you shall not change me into your own substance, as you do with the food of your body. Instead you shall be changed into me."

This is from the previous post of mine. Doesn’t sound very figurative to me! 🙂
 
As Saint Augustine wrote of the Eucharist in Confessions, "I am the food of full-grown men. Grow and you shall feed on me. But you shall not change me into your own substance, as you do with the food of your body. Instead you shall be changed into me."

This is from the previous post of mine. Doesn’t sound very figurative to me! 🙂
Writer,

Does Not St. Augustine say, “you SHALL NOT CHANGE ME INTO YOUR OWN SUBSTANCE… Instead you shall be changed into me”? Read his commentaries for yourself.

Jesus said, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every Word that proceeds from the mouth of God” Mt. 4:4.

Thanks
 
Writer,

Does Not St. Augustine say, “you SHALL NOT CHANGE ME INTO YOUR OWN SUBSTANCE… Instead you shall be changed into me”? Read his commentaries for yourself.

Jesus said, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every Word that proceeds from the mouth of God” Mt. 4:4.

Thanks

Right…meaning made more like Christ. I think I’m missing your point.

If it is of any interest, here is part of an earlier letter to an apologist concerning the last time we were discussing this identical issue on the Forums.

…I don’t know whether you read much C.S. Lewis, but one recurrent theme of his writing concerns the need to use caution when engaging in textual criticism not to over-step what is known about the author and step into speculation or assumption concerning his underlying motivations or deepest thoughts. Sometimes this is hard to avoid, but I’d humbly suggest that the proposition that Saint Augustine did not accept Transubstantiation as real is misleading and unfair to this great saint. In fact, I’d suggest that some of his passages (taken out of context on the Forum) are more aimed at addressing the wearisome argument that Catholics engage in cannibalism when they take the Sacrament. He appears to have been trying to clarify the Platonic distinction between appearance or “accidents” and actual substance. in other words, if God says that the door is now window, I’ll call it a window. Remember, Saint Augustine did have a classical or pagan, as he sometimes seems to think of it, education.

While it’s true that he seems to give conflicting statements at times, I think you nearly hit the nail on the head in your article. To Saint Augustine the Eucharist appears to be simultaneously both a profound symbol of unity and truly the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. I am no expert on Saint Augustine, but I remain unconvinced that Saint Augustine failed to believe in Transubstantiation. Granted, he may not have used quite the right vocabulary, but I believe we need to extend to him the honor of the benefit of the doubt. Reminds me of a C.S. Lewis quote from Letters to Malcolm.

I could wish that no definitions had ever been felt to be necessary; and, still more, that none had been allowed to make divisions between churches.

I am afraid this debate accomplishes little more than the splitting of hairs. In short, I suggest that we are going too far when we say that this great Saint failed to believe in Transubstantiation. As a curious aside to this debate, our arguing among ourselves makes it even easier for our separated brethren to point at us and observe that we can’t even agree on core issues such as this. Whether it is the aforementioned quote from *Confessions *or Saint Augustine’s words on adoration of the Eucharist (idolatry, if he failed to believe in Transubstantiation) to Saint Thomas Aquinas’ words on Saint Augustine’s understanding of the transformation of the communion elements to the body, blood, soul, and divinity, it seems to me that this saint was on the right track. If we can’t agree on this, then you will, at least, have to be willing to meet with Saint Augustine and me by the gilded forest at some future date to get to the bottom of this present apologetic controversy. 🙂


 
Let me ask you something. Right here. Did Jesus take a chunk of Himself and feed it to the disciples? Did He prick Himself and and pour the blood into the cup and pass it around?

No, right?

Jesus spoke in parables so that those around Him would understand what He was talking about. He even says, plain as day:

One minute He is calling it His blood and the very next breath He is calling it wine. Why would He tell them it was blood and then say it’s wine? Because calling it blood was saying what the wine represented. The blood that He was about to spill - His own blood. He wants us to partake in that sacrifice so we eat the bread and drink the wine to remember the sacrifice He made in a VERY real way.

When He says “Unless you eat my FLESH and drink my BLOOD you have no life in you.” He is saying that you have to remember and partake of the sacrifice. Even symbolism can be heavy. Just look at the parables!
Do you have another example of Jesus speaking in parables in the Bible when it wasn’t made clear that He was speaking in parable? Read John 6, in your case John 6:66, you are the one that walked away because the teaching was too difficult.

Read the early Church fathers, they clearly believed in the Eucharist. So did the Apostles. How could Paul tell Christians that if they recieve the Eucharist unworthyly they profain the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ? How could one “offend” wine and bread?
 
Do you have another example of Jesus speaking in parables in the Bible when it wasn’t made clear that He was speaking in parable? Read John 6, in your case John 6:66, you are the one that walked away because the teaching was too difficult.
I thought I was on ‘ignore’… 😛

I haven’t walked away… I am here aren’t I? When you have been taught one thing all your life you aren’t going to just drop it without carefully evaluating it… It doesn’t make sense to me but it doesn’t mean it’s impossible.
Read the early Church fathers, they clearly believed in the Eucharist. So did the Apostles. How could Paul tell Christians that if they recieve the Eucharist unworthyly they profain the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ? How could one “offend” wine and bread?
It isn’t the bread and wine they offend but Christ of whom it represents.

Consider:
1 Corinthians 11:20-22:
20When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper.

21For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.

22What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.
I think this explains itself about the Lord’s Supper. You don’t come to eat your fill but to share with others and to be together in Christ’s name.
1 Corinthians 11:23-26:
23For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

24And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

26For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.
I think this is interesting. If it was to be a literal thing why would you do it in REMEMBRANCE of Christ. Why would he choose that word? He also says that the cup is the new testament IN Christ’s blood not that it IS Christ’s blood. I also find it interesting that he doesn’t say ‘eat Christ’s body and drink His blood’ but rather he refers to it as bread and cup.
1 Corinthians 11:27-30:
27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
This whole thing started out with him scolding them that they are not coming to the Lord’s Supper for the right reasons. They come to have dinner but not remember the Lord within it. I find it interesting that he says that if you ‘examine’ yourself you are worthy of it. Not that you have confessed everything or been baptized but that you have examined yourself.
1 Corinthians 11:31-34:
31 But if we would examine ourselves, we would not be judged by God in this way. 32 Yet when we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned along with the world.

33 So, my dear brothers and sisters, when you gather for the Lord’s Supper, wait for each other. 34 If you are really hungry, eat at home so you won’t bring judgment upon yourselves when you meet together. I’ll give you instructions about the other matters after I arrive.
He is not talking about being unworthy because of anything BUT the fact that they do not wait for eachother nor do they come to the Lord’s table for the right reasons.
 
He is not talking about being unworthy because of anything BUT the fact that they do not wait for eachother nor do they come to the Lord’s table for the right reasons.
No what Paul says is:

“Therefore whoever **eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord **unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.”

Again how could drinking simple wine and eating baked bread have anything to do with offending the BODY and BLOOD of the LORD?

Anything you are saying is not addressing this very clear teaching. If reading Christ’s own words in John 6 which are clearly and easily stated won’t change your mind then I won’t either.

Long before Christians could even read on a decent level Christian worship centered on the Eucharist. The Eucharist was (and still is according to all the Apostolic Churches.) the culmination of Christian worship. Christians didn’t just invent this or believe it for no reason, it was (and is documented) passed on by the Apostles themselves in the scriptures and writings of the early Church Fathers, and Christs very words. You owe it to yourself to investigate what the early Church believed on the matter.
 
I thought I was on ‘ignore’… 😛
I think this is interesting. If it was to be a literal thing why would you do it in REMEMBRANCE of Christ. Why would he choose that word? He also says that the cup is the new testament IN Christ’s blood not that it IS Christ’s blood. I also find it interesting that he doesn’t say ‘eat Christ’s body and drink His blood’ but rather he refers to it as bread and cup.
.
On the same token you should find it “interesting” that Christ says “this IS my Body” not “this symbolizes my body”. “This IS my Blood”, not “this symbolizes my blood”. Compare Jesus giving the first Eucharist with John 6 and the teaching couldn’t be more clear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top