Communion of the Body of Christ

[MennoSota]

I think you are evading that EVEN THE SOLE THING YOU"VE NOTED says nothing whatsoever about anything at all being "symbolic" or a "metaphor."
Instead, it states (verbatim, literally, in black-and-white), "having partaken of the Body of Christ, approach also the cup of His blood."


Yup. Thank you for that confirmation of my point.




.

What does the water do, Josiah? I await your assertion and claim.

 

[MennoSota]

I think you are evading that EVEN THE SOLE THING YOU"VE NOTED says nothing whatsoever about anything at all being "symbolic" or a "metaphor."
Instead, it states (verbatim, literally, in black-and-white), "having partaken of the Body of Christ, approach also the cup of His blood."


Yup. Thank you for that confirmation of my point.




.

What does the wine and bread do Josiah? What magic did Jesus declares happens? Did Jesus have his disciples eat his human flesh and drink his human blood?
I suspect you believe it was really his human flesh and human blood that got magically created from the wine and bread. That's what real presence claims. Josiah... that's called cannibalism. Cannibals believe that by eating the flesh of their enemy and drinking their blood, they are getting the spirit energy of their enemy. Your claim is no different than a cannibal. No flaming here, just stating what cannibals do and how it matches your real presence argument.

 

[Arsenios]

You ignore the didache which doesn't declare real presence.

The Didache is written for beginners, on how they are to approach the Cup and the Gifts... It was written so early that at that time, the Real Presence of God in the Gifts was being kept secret from the world around them... It seems to be re-discovering that secrecy in these late days... It does not say everything... It is a guide for those new to the Faith and Baptized into Christ...


Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

The Didache is written for beginners, on how they are to approach the Cup and the Gifts... It was written so early that at that time, the Real Presence of God in the Gifts was being kept secret from the world around them... It seems to be re-discovering that secrecy in these late days... It does not say everything... It is a guide for those new to the Faith and Baptized into Christ...


Arsenios

What a foolish claim, Arsenios. You are saying the didache was written by simpletins, for simpletons, until the smarter folk came along 200 years later. You claim the believers kept it a secret.
Sorry, Arsenios, I call your claim hogwash.

 

[Josiah]

The Didache is written for beginners, on how they are to approach the Cup and the Gifts... It was written so early that at that time, the Real Presence of God in the Gifts was being kept secret from the world around them... It seems to be re-discovering that secrecy in these late days... It does not say everything... It is a guide for those new to the Faith and Baptized into Christ...

MennoSota shared a quote from the Early Church that specifically, verbatim, literally speaks of "The blood of Christ... the body of Christ" and never once so much as even MENTIONS words like "symbol" "metaphor" etc. Then tries to say this proves the early church all believed in a purely symbolic, metaphoric meaning and obviously rejected that Christ's body and blood are present. I find that ... well... odd.

Now, I "get" the point he makes that not EVERY known piece of writing in the world from the dawn of writing to the statements of Zwingli ALL stated, "what Jesus said in about Holy Communion is true - real presence is something we all affirm." Yeah, there ARE some written documents in the world from 4000 BC to 1500 AD where we do NOT see such. But I find it illogical to conclude that proves no one (or even any one) didn't accept Real Presence. Seems like a really ... how to be nice about this... um, not a sound argument.

 

[atpollard]

The Didache is written for beginners, on how they are to approach the Cup and the Gifts... It was written so early that at that time, the Real Presence of God in the Gifts was being kept secret from the world around them... It seems to be re-discovering that secrecy in these late days... It does not say everything... It is a guide for those new to the Faith and Baptized into Christ...


Arsenios

Isn’t that the argument for Gnosticism (by definition) ... “we have secret knowledge that was not written in scripture but was hidden from the simple believers and entrusted to only a secret few.”

 

[atpollard]

Why would you assume that angels think the rest of what their Lord said is not worth anything?

Quote where I said that.

 

[MennoSota]

MennoSota shared a quote from the Early Church that specifically, verbatim, literally speaks of "The blood of Christ... the body of Christ" and never once so much as even MENTIONS words like "symbol" "metaphor" etc. Then tries to say this proves the early church all believed in a purely symbolic, metaphoric meaning and obviously rejected that Christ's body and blood are present. I find that ... well... odd.

Well..you've simply lied.
I shared the quote because there is nothing about "real presence."
I am not attempting to claim a universal statement that all persons considered it symbolic.
I find it odd that you insist on twisting what I shared and claiming something false as a means of attempting to make a point.

Now, I "get" the point he makes that not EVERY known piece of writing in the world from the dawn of writing to the statements of Zwingli ALL stated, "what Jesus said in about Holy Communion is true - real presence is something we all affirm." Yeah, there ARE some written documents in the world from 4000 BC to 1500 AD where we do NOT see such. But I find it illogical to conclude that proves no one (or even any one) didn't accept Real Presence. Seems like a really ... how to be nice about this... um, not a sound argument.

Well...since Jesus didn't claim real presence (unless you think he was advocating cannibalism) it seems you have no leg to stand on.

 

[Arsenios]

What a foolish claim, Arsenios. You are saying the didache was written by simpletins, for simpletons, until the smarter folk came along 200 years later. You claim the believers kept it a secret.
Sorry, Arsenios, I call your claim hogwash.

If I had claimed what you say, it WOULD BE hogwash...

A.

 

[Arsenios]

Isn’t that the argument for Gnosticism (by definition) ... “we have secret knowledge that was not written in scripture but was hidden from the simple believers and entrusted to only a secret few.”

I think the Bible tells us that they were "hidden in Christ"...

They were not proclaiming to the world that they were eating His Flesh and drinking His Blood...

Not in a pagan dominated culture...

They kept that to themselves...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

Jesus didn't claim real presence

Yes He did...

Joh 6:51
I am the living bread
which came down from heaven:
if any man eat of this bread,
he shall live for ever:
and the bread that I will give is my flesh,
which I will give for the life of the world.

Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

Yes He did...

Joh 6:51
I am the living bread
which came down from heaven:
if any man eat of this bread,
he shall live for ever:
and the bread that I will give is my flesh,
which I will give for the life of the world.

Arsenios

So I take it that you believe anyone who eats a communion wafer or drinks from a communion cup receives eternal life. One shot should do it...

John 6:43-58 Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father. Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the breadthe fathers ate, and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”


Or...perhaps Jesus wasn't being literal and was using figurative language.
But, hey, you'll certainly find out if your bread eating and wine drinking saved you when you stand before God. Good luck with that.

 

[Arsenios]

So I take it that you believe anyone who eats a communion wafer or drinks from a communion cup receives eternal life. One shot should do it...

I believe Christ...

I do not know about communion wafers...

"I will partake of the Cup of Salvation...
And I will call upon the Name of the Lord..."

John 6:43-58 Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father. Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the breadthe fathers ate, and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”

No ambiguity here...

Or...perhaps Jesus wasn't being literal and was using figurative language.

Descriptive...

But, hey, you'll certainly find out
if your bread eating and wine drinking saved you
when you stand before God.
Good luck with that.

It can be unto Salvation and unto damnation...
The Body of our Lord needs discernment...
Paul wrote of those who partook without discerning the Body of Christ...
They became ill and some even died, remember...?

Remember that the Body of Christ is Christ's...
ONLY He can give it...
Saying some words over a loaf of bread and a bottle of wine won't cut it...
He only commanded His 12 to consecrate it...

One of them committed suicide after betraying Him...
And the betrayal after eating His Body and drinking His Blood...
Because he had hidden and unrepented and ongoing sin...
Which he was concealing from God...

As Adam also concealed his shame from God...

We are all sinners, Menno...

Either struggling in repentance...

Or hiding from man and God...


Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

I believe Christ...

I do not know about communion wafers...

"I will partake of the Cup of Salvation...
And I will call upon the Name of the Lord..."



No ambiguity here...



Descriptive...



It can be unto Salvation and unto damnation...
The Body of our Lord needs discernment...
Paul wrote of those who partook without discerning the Body of Christ...
They became ill and some even died, remember...?

Remember that the Body of Christ is Christ's...
ONLY He can give it...
Saying some words over a loaf of bread and a bottle of wine won't cut it...
He only commanded His 12 to consecrate it...

One of them committed suicide after betraying Him...
And the betrayal after eating His Body and drinking His Blood...
Because he had hidden and unrepented and ongoing sin...
Which he was concealing from God...

As Adam also concealed his shame from God...

We are all sinners, Menno...

Either struggling in repentance...

Or hiding from man and God...


Arsenios

If you take Jesus as speaking literally and not figuratively, then there is no need for grace. Anyone who eats his bread and drinks his wine is eternally saved...no questions asked.

Of course, taking Jesus literally in this passage actually contradicts what Jesus says in the passage, so good luck with that contradiction and good luck thinking you will be in heaven by your works and not by grace.

 

[Albion]

Of course, taking Jesus literally in this passage actually contradicts what Jesus says in the passage, so good luck with that contradiction and good luck thinking you will be in heaven by your works and not by grace.

Eliminating from consideration everything Christ said there except for the word "remembrance" is not really sound exegesis.

 

[Josiah]

Well..you've simply lied

I simply quoted - VERBATIM - where you're quote specifically, verbatim, literally, word-for-word STATES of the Eucharist, "The body of Christ" and "the blood of Christ."
AND I noted that NOWHERE in the quote - nowhere - do we even find the words "symbol" "represents" "metaphor" "not."


It's undeniable, it's indisputable, you dug and dug, looking for something to support the 16th Century Zwinglian reinvention - and instead proved it didn't exist, even more, you actually confirmed my point. Right there is black-and-white, right there VERBATIM. I thanked you. If you have something in Scripture that states, "This is not true" "this is but a symbol" "this is a metaphor" "this cannot be true so it's not" Then share it. But what we seem to have is a consistent use of the word "IS". And 1500 years of Christians understanding that as true. What we have is NOTHING that REMOTELY indicates some mere symbolic thing (perhaps like foot washing; an act all saw as only a symbol - and thus rarely (if at all) practiced it or regarded such as important BECAUSE it was only a metaphor, a symbol); what we have is the opposite...) And there are no warnings regarding foot washing because it's only a symbol, a metaphor - as everyone acknowledged, but compare that to 1 Corinthians 11:28-30. NO metaphor, NO symbol has such attached to it - because they are only symbols. BUT..... because it's not.





.

 

[Lamb]

If you take Jesus as speaking literally and not figuratively, then there is no need for grace. Anyone who eats his bread and drinks his wine is eternally saved...no questions asked.

Of course, taking Jesus literally in this passage actually contradicts what Jesus says in the passage, so good luck with that contradiction and good luck thinking you will be in heaven by your works and not by grace.

Maybe you should ask the question "WHY it's for the forgiveness of sins?" Or "HOW" instead of assuming you think it's bread and wine that do something just like you think we believe water does something in baptism. Ask questions and listen and learn instead of forcing your dogma into things.

 

[MennoSota]

Eliminating from consideration everything Christ said there except for the word "remembrance" is not really sound exegesis.

I didn't eliminate anything. I point out that a purely literal interpretation causes significant contradictions that are irreconcilable with grace alone. Do you believe in works salvation or salvation by grace alone?

 

[MennoSota]

I simply quoted - VERBATIM - where you're quote specifically, verbatim, literally, word-for-word STATES of the Eucharist, "The body of Christ" and "the blood of Christ."
AND I noted that NOWHERE in the quote - nowhere - do we even find the words "symbol" "represents" "metaphor" "not."


It's undeniable, it's indisputable, you dug and dug, looking for something to support the 16th Century Zwinglian reinvention - and instead proved it didn't exist, even more, you actually confirmed my point. Right there is black-and-white, right there VERBATIM. I thanked you. If you have something in Scripture that states, "This is not true" "this is but a symbol" "this is a metaphor" "this cannot be true so it's not" Then share it. But what we seem to have is a consistent use of the word "IS". And 1500 years of Christians understanding that as true. What we have is NOTHING that REMOTELY indicates some mere symbolic thing (perhaps like foot washing; an act all saw as only a symbol - and thus rarely (if at all) practiced it or regarded such as important BECAUSE it was only a metaphor, a symbol); what we have is the opposite...) And there are no warnings regarding foot washing because it's only a symbol, a metaphor - as everyone acknowledged, but compare that to 1 Corinthians 11:28-30. NO metaphor, NO symbol has such attached to it - because they are only symbols. BUT..... because it's not.





.

You completely ignore that your quote comes 200 years after the didache, yet you imply it is immediate in time with the Bible. That is you lying, Josiah, in order to twist your position.
Just admit that your universal claim was a foolish claim on your part.

 

[MennoSota]

Maybe you should ask the question "WHY it's for the forgiveness of sins?" Or "HOW" instead of assuming you think it's bread and wine that do something just like you think we believe water does something in baptism. Ask questions and listen and learn instead of forcing your dogma into things.

Maybe you should ask why you have a misunderstanding of the verse?
If baptism forgives sins then there is no need for repentance. There is no need for faith. There is no need for grace. All anyone needs to do is be baptized.
So, might it be that you are misunderstanding Peter?