COMMUNION: Does "is" mean "is?" Catholic, Lutheran, Evangelical

[MennoSota]

No that'd be if they were in wilful sin or hating someone staying bitter not repenting and still taking it.
They believe He's spiritually in the bread and wine if I get what they believe. Maybe they're wrong about that but I don't see how that matters.
I believe His blood still cleanses me. That has nothing to do w a new offer.

But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.

What I believe is that when you eat and drink it, in the spiritual He cleanses you from sin and you have communion with Him. Not only through communion but it's extra powerful. Just don't worship the bread and wine instead of Him like they did w the snake on the pole.

You were cleansed once and for all by his atonement. No need to have Christ die over and over again.

 

[MennoSota]

In other words, you do not have an answer about how everyone can be wrong except you.



Wrong again. At least so far as the Lutherans are concerned.

LOL, tell that to the Swedes and Finns who were required to be Lutherans by law.

 

[MennoSota]

Wrong.


You continue to show your enormous misunderstanding of Real Presence, your confusion with it and Transubstantiation and your infusion of the idea of Sacrifice into views it is entirely unrelated to.

And your desire to shift the discussion to the idea of Sacrifice and to the separation of church and state does NOTHING to support the 16th Century invention of the dogma that "is" means "is not," NOTHING to support your insistence that we must not accept exactly what Scripture states while you insist we must accept what Scripture states while you shout we must not accept what Scripture states. You insist we must not echo denominational tradition while you perfectly echo Zwinglian denominational tradition.



- Josiah

Is means is.
But then you twist it so that is means a spiritual is not a physical is, but a real is nonetheless. It's a rather convoluted mess you are living with.
If is means is then you is crucifying Christ, eating his flesh and drinking his blood...for real. Is means is.
Be consistent rather than hold some nebulous position where is means is, but not really, yet really.
The Lutheran position is more messed up than the Roman position in that at least the Romans are consistent. They are consistently wrong, but at least they are consistent.

 

[MennoSota]

And the original Passover was not just a symbol was it?

How many symbols in scripture can you come up with that bring a warning from God concerning falling ill and dying? It would not be consistent with who God is to have a warning for something that is symbolic only.

Yes, the original Passover was just a symbolic memorial. There was no mystical powers moving over the Sadir meal. It is solemn and ordained by God as a remembrance...just as the last supper is a solemn remembrance.
We don't take communion flippantly. It is a solemn ceremony.

 

[MennoSota]

No, it is the same one and only sacrifice. Don't limit God.

So...Jesus is still on the cross and dying. He hasn't been buried or risen...because...according to you...it's still the same crucifixion going on today?
That's just wrong on your part.

 

[Lamb]

Yes, the original Passover was just a symbolic memorial. There was no mystical powers moving over the Sadir meal. It is solemn and ordained by God as a remembrance...just as the last supper is a solemn remembrance.
We don't take communion flippantly. It is a solemn ceremony.

The ORIGINAL Passover...something actually took place. I can quote it here for you.

We now have the true lamb of God. The sacrifices have ended. We aren't like the Jews who needed to keep sacrificing. We have Jesus and He gives us in COMMUNION His body and blood. This is my Body. This is my blood. It's given FOR YOU.

 

[MennoSota]

You were taught by someone that communion is symbolic only. You did not see that word in scripture.

I read the gospels and see that Jesus never carved out a chunk of his flesh nor did he cut open a vein to get a pint of blood. I see clearly that he is connecting his future atonement with the Jewish Passover.

 

[Lamb]

So...Jesus is still on the cross and dying. He hasn't been buried or risen...because...according to you...it's still the same crucifixion going on today?
That's just wrong on your part.

You limit God with time. It's not that Jesus has not been resurrected. It's just that when He says that it IS his body and blood we believe it. You believe Zwingli a man who built up the symbolic communion to turn believers away from what Jesus gives us.

 

[Lamb]

I read the gospels and see that Jesus never carved out a chunk of his flesh nor did he cut open a vein to get a pint of blood. I see clearly that he is connecting his future atonement with the Jewish Passover.

Who says that Jesus carved out anything? Where are you getting these ideas?

 

[MennoSota]

Is it so hard to believe that the original Passover was real? We are now allowed to receive the true lamb of God in Holy Communion as the Apostles taught the early church fathers.

Of course the Passover in Egypt was real. But every time the Passover is celebrated it doesn't mean that it is really happening over and over again like a song set on repeat.

 

[Josiah]

That's just wrong on your part.

No, you are just desperately trying to change the topic. "Real Presence" no where teaches ANYTHING about ANY Sacrifice of ANYTHING or ANYONE, hello - the word "sacrifice" never even appears in the Eucharist texts and as you have been repeatedly been told, MANY who accept the words Jesus said do NOT accept any idea of the Eucharist as Sacrifice. You are just avoiding the issue, and friend, we all know it.


You insist that we just stick to exactly what Scripture says, what Jesus voiced and what Paul penned. But when you noted this is what your opponents do and that you do the exact opposite, you seem to avoid the issue and have tried to change the topic, trying to accuse others of something they've told you - over and over - they don't believe or teach or confess. If you think the Eucharist is not a sacrifice, take that up with folks who think it is (none of whom are at CH).



Real Presence:

Real Presence simply accepts and believes what Jesus said and Paul penned. As is. No doubts, no denials, no deleting what they stated and replacing it with what self things must be the truth.
It's not rocket science. It's not complicated.
"Is" = is.
"Body" = body
"Blood" = blood
"Bread" = bread

It's not rocket science, it's not complicated.

Real Presence does NOT insert into the mouth of Jesus words He didn't say such as "NOT" "represents" "symbolizes" "metaphor" "change" "alchemy" "Transubstantiation" "Aristotle" "Accidents" "sacrifice" while deleting words He did say.

It's not rocket science, it's not all that complicated.



Now, yes, this raises physics questions. Just as we have with the Two Natures of Christ and the Trinity and a whole LOT of other truths. But for 1500+ years, all Christians were humble enough to accept that God just may know more about the things of God than our current scientists do, there's no reason to shout "NO WAY!" to what God so clearly states just because we have difficulty explaining it via our current understandings of physics. For 1500 years, Christians didn't use words like "theology" and "doctrine" very much, rather the truths of God were called "The MYSTERIES of God." Scripture calls on Christians to be "Stewards of the MYSTERIES of God," not "Correctors of God getting God out of trouble and falsehood by making it fit our human ideas of philosophy and physics." As with the Trinity and the Two Natures and so many other things, accept what God says because God knows and God says.... if our puny, fallen, sinful, limited brains can't totally wrap themselves around it, that's really not shocking and doesn't make God wrong.



The "is NOT" view, the "it's not really true but metaphor" view was invented by Ulrich Zwingli in the 16th Century because his (wrong) Christology and his (wrong) view of physics read what Jesus said and Paul penned... what all Christians up until then had accepted and believed and treasured in unity..... and shouted "NO WAY! CAN'T BE TRUE!" So he did something new and radical: insisting that we cannot accept what Jesus said and Paul penned because it didn't jibe with Ulrich's (wrong) Christology and (wrong) view of physics. Today, much of modern "Evangelicalism" and some of modern Calvinism has bought into his revolution, his new theory dividing Christianity in the process and of course raising HIGH the thought that if Scripture states something that doesn't "jibe" with an individual's own philosophy and concepts of science, then Scripture is wrong and we must "spin" it to "say" the opposite of what it states in order to keep God from being wrong. Much of liberalism traces back to Zwingli and his revolution.



- Josiah

 

[Lamb]

Of course the Passover in Egypt was real. But every time the Passover is celebrated it doesn't mean that it is really happening over and over again like a song set on repeat.

God did not promise that anything would happen after that first time. But that first time was real just as Holy Communion is. Jesus tells us that This IS His body. This IS His blood.

 

[Albion]

I read the gospels and see that Jesus never carved out a chunk of his flesh nor did he cut open a vein to get a pint of blood. I see clearly that he is connecting his future atonement with the Jewish Passover.

But he clearly changed the meal at the Last Supper. And, BTW he only was baptized once, crucified once, was resurrected once, founded his church once, and only ascended to his Father once, so the idea that he could not have instituted a new ceremony on that occasion which gives himself to his followers and also is a memorial of his death and sacrifice...is not credible.

 

[Albion]

LOL, tell that to the Swedes and Finns who were required to be Lutherans by law.

Only briefly during the first days of the Reformation. In that same century, members of other Christians faiths were recognized and were prominent in society. No chopping of their heads. Sorry.

 

[Imalive]

You were cleansed once and for all by his atonement. No need to have Christ die over and over again.

Yes but that text says His blood cleanses us. It's not once a cleansing 2000 years ago. His blood still speaks.

 

[user1234]

Those are a lot of questions. Our site rules do not say that we must assume everyone is saved. But you have a tendency to assume Roman Catholics are not saved and CH considers that denomination to be a Christian one.

I am saved by grace through faith in Jesus our Savior who died on the cross for the forgiveness of my sins. God has chosen to use means to bring that to me through the waters in baptism BY HIS WORD and also I receive the same forgiveness won at the cross as I receive the body and blood of the Lord that HE gives to me. Our Lord is ever wanting to give to us. He does not let His children starve and we are fed on His Word and strengthened by faith by that same Word that is found in scriptures, in the waters of baptism and in Eucharist where we receive our Lord's Body and Blood. It is not a new forgiveness. It is not separate from the cross but all connected because God has chosen to bring us the blessings of the cross in those manners.

I guess different ppl get saved in different ways, according to their traditions or denominational teachings, then, because other ppl, like RomanCatholics for one, and I'm thinking Pentecostals for another, for examples, would say something different.

I believe the bible teaches we're saved by grace thru faith alone, and kept the same way, apart from any works including water-baptism or sharing the bread and wine. Saved by FAITH in Jesus' finished work on the cross and resurrection ... His work, faith being the means of receiving salvation.

I see that the Lutheran denomination has different means than that for receiving salvation or forgiveness, as you said, and thats fine, that explains some things, and you are free to believe what you believe, no problem.

So am I, yes no?

As far as site rules, are they different for different members, as I was told its not to ask someone if theyre saved, or pray for their salvation. I did ask someone, prior to knowing, and they refused to answer, which is fine, but then we have nothing else to go on but their silence or their doctrines they publicly profess.

I was handcuffed a bit from giving the gospel, and was told in no uncertain terms that everyone here is brothers/sisters in Christ, so if that isnt site rules across the board assuming all are saved, then is it a rule only for certain members?

As far as the accusation (false) that I assume RomanCatholics arent saved, Im really REALLY getting tired of having to tell the same ppl the same thing over and over yet have them continue to make the same false accusations about me on a public forum ...its looking more and more like deliberate goading and its inflammatory in nature, but I will explain it one last time, and then if it happens again, everyone will know its not just an accident or misunderstanding, but a deliberate false accusation, no, make that lie.

If ppl cant make a distinction between a Roman Catholic PERSON and Roman CatholiCISM, their DENOMINATION, the teachING, then that's their choice, but I dont assume anything about any individuals salvation. In fact, I wouldnt assume anyone here is saved or not if I wasnt told.

So I'll say it one last time...
I have many family members and friends who are members of the RC denomination.
I know of at least one I can confidently say is saved.
I pray they all will be.
But I also have one relative for example, who prays the rosary like a nut, and thinks others of US are not saved bc we dont follow the RC's teaching.

If shes praying to Mary to pray for her now and at the hour of her death many times a day, she obviously isnt trusting in Jesus' finished work to save her, so it wouldnt be right to assume shes saved right now, would it?

I also believe God can (and will) save her, but not BECAUSE of her RC adherence, but IN SPITE of it, but I love her and all the others just the same, including any professing RC on this site.

But there are clearly doctrines and practices of the RC denom that are heretical (some would say abominations) and doctrine that Jesus hates and so do I, and so should you, or has the reformation ended and we can all go home?

I dont know if this final plea for ppl to learn how to differentiate between person and position will be heard or ignored, but from now on if someone falsely accuses me of 'bashing' or 'hating' another PERSON on this site, I will call it what it is, a lie from the devil and reject it in Jesus' name.

I have made this request and explained the distinction numerous times, it shouldnt be that hard to understand. Ok? Thanks, as politely as I can ask, thanks. Ok?

 

[Josiah]

:focus:

 

[Albion]

I guess different ppl get saved in different ways, according to their traditions or denominational teachings, then, because other ppl, like RomanCatholics for one, and I'm thinking Pentecostals for another, for examples, would say something different.

I believe the bible teaches we're saved by grace thru faith alone, and kept the same way, apart from any works including water-baptism or sharing the bread and wine. Saved by FAITH in Jesus' finished work on the cross and resurrection ... His work, faith being the means of receiving salvation.

I see that the Lutheran denomination has different means than that for receiving salvation or forgiveness, as you said, and thats fine, that explains some things, and you are free to believe what you believe, no problem.

??? Lutherans believe that the bible teaches we're saved by grace thru faith alone, just as you said above that you do. (For that matter, so do almost all Protestant churches say the same). I know that this is not the main point you meant to make in this post, but it seems worth noting.



.

 

[Lamb]

I guess different ppl get saved in different ways, according to their traditions or denominational teachings, then, because other ppl, like RomanCatholics for one, and I'm thinking Pentecostals for another, for examples, would say something different.

I believe the bible teaches we're saved by grace thru faith alone, and kept the same way, apart from any works including water-baptism or sharing the bread and wine. Saved by FAITH in Jesus' finished work on the cross and resurrection ... His work, faith being the means of receiving salvation.

I see that the Lutheran denomination has different means than that for receiving salvation or forgiveness, as you said, and thats fine, that explains some things, and you are free to believe what you believe, no problem.

So am I, yes no?

As far as site rules, are they different for different members, as I was told its not to ask someone if theyre saved, or pray for their salvation. I did ask someone, prior to knowing, and they refused to answer, which is fine, but then we have nothing else to go on but their silence or their doctrines they publicly profess.

I was handcuffed a bit from giving the gospel, and was told in no uncertain terms that everyone here is brothers/sisters in Christ, so if that isnt site rules across the board assuming all are saved, then is it a rule only for certain members?

As far as the accusation (false) that I assume RomanCatholics arent saved, Im really REALLY getting tired of having to tell the same ppl the same thing over and over yet have them continue to make the same false accusations about me on a public forum ...its looking more and more like deliberate goading and its inflammatory in nature, but I will explain it one last time, and then if it happens again, everyone will know its not just an accident or misunderstanding, but a deliberate false accusation, no, make that lie.

If ppl cant make a distinction between a Roman Catholic PERSON and Roman CatholiCISM, their DENOMINATION, the teachING, then that's their choice, but I dont assume anything about any individuals salvation. In fact, I wouldnt assume anyone here is saved or not if I wasnt told.

So I'll say it one last time...
I have many family members and friends who are members of the RC denomination.
I know of at least one I can confidently say is saved.
I pray they all will be.
But I also have one relative for example, who prays the rosary like a nut, and thinks others of US are not saved bc we dont follow the RC's teaching.

If shes praying to Mary to pray for her now and at the hour of her death many times a day, she obviously isnt trusting in Jesus' finished work to save her, so it wouldnt be right to assume shes saved right now, would it?

I also believe God can (and will) save her, but not BECAUSE of her RC adherence, but IN SPITE of it, but I love her and all the others just the same, including any professing RC on this site.

But there are clearly doctrines and practices of the RC denom that are heretical (some would say abominations) and doctrine that Jesus hates and so do I, and so should you, or has the reformation ended and we can all go home?

I dont know if this final plea for ppl to learn how to differentiate between person and position will be heard or ignored, but from now on if someone falsely accuses me of 'bashing' or 'hating' another PERSON on this site, I will call it what it is, a lie from the devil and reject it in Jesus' name.

I have made this request and explained the distinction numerous times, it shouldnt be that hard to understand. Ok? Thanks, as politely as I can ask, thanks. Ok?

Snerfle, as far as most of your post concerning site rules and what you posted and what was sent to you by PM, this should really be discussed in the Member Admin Center. This thread is not that topic.

 

[Lamb]

??? Lutherans believe that the bible teaches we're saved by grace thru faith alone, just as you said above that you do. (For that matter, so do almost Protestant churches say the same). I know that this is not the main point you meant to make in this post, but it seems worth noting.

Yes, thank you for responding to him. Obviously he doesn't see that we believe God saves us 100%.