Communion of the Body of Christ

[zecryphon_nomdiv]

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?

We believe God uses multiple ways to deliver grace to the Christian.

 

[Lamb]

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?

Baptism is connected to the cross. Communion is connected to the cross.

Baptism and Holy Communion are means that God uses and are not separate salvation methods apart from the cross. We receive what God gives us in both baptism and Communion. These are the things that are important to understand and not push aside saying it's just tradition because it really does actually mean something and the disciples/apostles knew it.

 

[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.

You ignored the term "descriptively" in favor of your fallen Adamic logic of "literally" vs "figuratively"...

You have fallen into the "fallacy of the false alternative"...

It is either RED or GREEN, you say...

And a child points out it is MAGENTA with GOLD lettering...

You are relying on fallen human reasoning to reach your conclusion...

And in the process, you are scorning the very words of Christ...

Substituting your fallen reasoning for God's Revelation in Scripture...

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.

That is why I take Jesus for what he said as "descriptive"...

Look, Menno - When He Blessed the Bread and the Wine, He had not yet been Crucified... Yet He said: "Take... Eat... This My Body IS...". So if you take him literally, lest you call Him a liar, you must say that the Blessed-by-God Bread CANNOT be His Crucified flesh and blood Body... So which Body IS it? And if you take it "figuratively", then you can make it up yourself to mean whatever you imagine it might be... And in the process make yourself to be God...

And the answer is that it is His RISEN Body, consecrated before it had been Crucified and had Risen to the Right Hand of the Father... It is the Body that invisibly passed through walls and appeared to the Disciples and ate fish and honey... It is Christ Who Blesses this Bread to become His Body, and He is doing so to this very day and hour, at every Christian Divine Liturgy which participates in the ongoing Liturgy at the Throne of the Lamb... By the hands of the Priest Christ Blesses the Bread and the Wine in that Service as it becomes His Body and His Blood... He gives Thanks and Blesses it, Menno...

We are already in Heaven, Menno, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand, and the violent are seizing it by violence, remember?

Because they are repenting violently against their own sins...

And God's Grace has entered them into Heaven whilst still upon the earth...


Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

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?

So we can safely just remove that verse from the Bible, Menno?

You know which verse, don't you?

The verse that tells us Baptism is for the Remission of sins??

I thought you believed the Bible, Meno...

So now you are re-writing it??

ANATHEMA!!!

may it NEVER be so!!

Not MY Menno!!


Arsenios

 

[Albion]

I didn't eliminate anything.

Sure you did. To be fair, however, I was thinking not just of that message, but also others of yours from past months.

 

[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.

I said it was written for beginners...

Here is the first paragraph...

Does it sound like it is for the mature?


Chapter 1.
There are two ways, one of life and one of death,
but a great difference between the two ways.
The way of life, then, is this:
First, you shall love God who made you;
second, love your neighbor as yourself,
and do not do to another what you would not want done to you.
And of these sayings the teaching is this:
Bless those who curse you, and
pray for your enemies, and
fast for those who persecute you.
For what reward is there for loving those who love you?
Do not the Gentiles do the same?
But love those who hate you,
and you shall not have an enemy.
Abstain from fleshly and worldly lusts.
If someone strikes your right cheek,
turn to him the other also,
and you shall be perfect.
If someone impresses you for one mile,
go with him two.
If someone takes your cloak,
give him also your coat.
If someone takes from you what is yours,
ask it not back, for indeed you are not able.
Give to every one who asks you,
and ask it not back;
for the Father wills that to all should be given of our own blessings (free gifts).
Happy is he who gives according to the commandment, for he is guiltless.
Woe to him who receives; for if one receives who has need, he is guiltless;
but he who receives not having need shall pay the penalty,
why he received and for what.
And coming into confinement, he shall be examined
concerning the things which he has done,
and he shall not escape from there
until he pays back the last penny.
And also concerning this, it has been said,
Let your alms sweat in your hands,
until you know to whom you should give.


Have you read this work?


Arsenios

 

[Josiah]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD28OM1nV04


There are MANY truths which Scripture proclaims (and most Christians believe) that simply are not humanly and cognatively understandable, they are MYSTERIES Enemies of the faith are quick and constant in pointing out unanswered questions and mysteries, to try to suggest such proves what Scripture says (and most Christians believe) can't be true.

Interestingly, history shows one of the first of these was the accusation of pagan Greeks and Romans that Christians were cannibals. We know from this TOO that all Christians believed in Real Presence (that didn't change until the 16th Century) but the pagans tried to ridicule the Bible and Christianity by this accusation of cannibalism. Of course, this went away as paganism did, only to arise again with Zwingli and his followers who parroted the pagan ridicule.

I hold this is yet another aspect of the MYSTERY and as such is best left alone. But in this video, Dr. Cooper addresses it. His approach is the same as what I've heard from other Lutherans, Catholics, etc. and the same as that given by the Early Church Fathers.



In the second argument here ( http://unamsanctamcatholicam.com/ap...ic-apologetics/202-eucharist-cannibalism.html ), a Catholic apologist gives another popular view on this..... it may be fine but IMO such "explanations" likely just go too far; works, perhaps, but best to leave this where the Bible and Christianity did for 1500 years - believing the mystery.



Thank you.


- Josiah




.

 

[Particular]

If person's were eating the actual body and drinking the actual blood of Jesus body, they would be, by any definition, cannibals.
However, that is not actually happening, so Christians are not cannibals.

 

[Josiah]

However, that is not actually happening, so Christians are not cannibals.

Agreed. Every Christian until Zwingli in the 16th Century agreed. Of course, they also accepted and believed what the Bible says and thus accepted Real Presence. Zwingli (who denied the Two Natures of Christ) simply concluded that it's a violation of physics for Jesus to be present and thus what Jesus said and Paul penned isn't possible, and thus had to be spun in such a way as to make Jesus "jibe" with his medieval sense of physics.

 

[George]

The Orthodox practice closed communion and believe it to be the Body and Blood of Christ. The Holy Gifts are consecrated and the Holy Spirit is asked to descend down on them and make them the Body and Blood it Christ. No name given to that process, nor do we try to explain how it happens.

 

[Andrew]

The Orthodox practice closed communion and believe it to be the Body and Blood of Christ. The Holy Gifts are consecrated and the Holy Spirit is asked to descend down on them and make them the Body and Blood it Christ. No name given to that process, nor do we try to explain how it happens.

Jesus had a new supernatural body, he could appear at will and transcend through walls, I do not find the idea that he can occupy bread and wine as far fetched in that sense, you're right we can't explain it so I'll just take Jesus word for it

 

[Josiah]

Jesus had a new supernatural body, he could appear at will and transcend through walls, I do not find the idea that he can occupy bread and wine as far fetched in that sense, you're right we can't explain it so I'll just take Jesus word for it

I agree....



Two points, if I may...


1. Of course, Jesus is BOTH God and man.... God and flesh/blood.... .BOTH. ALWAYS. 100%/100%. INSEPARABLE. If God can be anywhere, so can JESUS. Now, in the Doctrine of the Two Natures of Christ, there is "the communication of attributes" which means the divine "communicates" with the human/flesh but not generally the other way around (thus His flesh could be killed but not God, for example; His human nature may be ignorant of something but not his divine). This makes for some mind-numbing MYSTERY. And yes, it seems our senses don't always preceive what is REAL. Rather than deny t he Divinity of Jesus and the "communication of attributes" as Zwingli (the first to deny Real Presence) did, we need to accept what Scripture says and BELIEVE - realizing we have a mystery here that our puny, fallen, human brains cannot understand. THAT'S Zwingli's mistake. He held that Jesus CANNOT be fully God AND man.... and thus Jesus CANNOT be in heaven and in bread/wine... thus Jesus and Paul were wrong when they (admittedly) said JESUS (not just the divine Second Person of the TRinity) IS here (He also denied that JESUS is with us, as He promised, because what He promised is impossible).


2. When Zwingli denied Real Presence (the first Christian in history to do so, in the 16th Century), he simply assumed that his concept of physics had to be correct and that God had to submit to it. He (who had never studied the subject AT ALL) just knew all about physics and sadly had to correct God who clearly didn't understand physics. Now, as one with a Ph.D. in physics, if we look at this from a 16th Century understanding of physics, he might have had a point. In fact, his point could stand perhaps into the 19th Century. But no longer. The GREAT, OVERWHELMING amount of "space" is in fact empty.... some 99% of an atom is empty, and it IS possible to put something there. And of course, there may WELL be many universes - side by side - occupying the "same space" (as our universe understands), and yes, it IS possible for them to interact (yup, some sci fi runs with this - I love Stranger Things, lol). Even science laity understands this... it IS current science (flowing in part from string theory). So, while Zwingli (who had NEVER studied physics AT ALL and was completely ignorant) denied what God said because God was the ignorant one when it comes to physics. Today, physics would be apt to say it's Zwingli who had a problem. Now, do NOT take this to mean some current concept in physics SUPPORTS Real Presence (no scientist is investigating the Holy Eucharist on this point, lol) ONLY that Zwingli's denials based on his misunderstanding of physics doesn't hold anymore.


I hold that it's better to believe Jesus than to tell Him, "I know more about physics than You do and You are WRONG there so I must deny what You clearly said and promised." Just as Zwingli did - with Jesus' promise that HE is with us always, and with His teaching that HIS flesh/blood is present. I may have the Ph.D. in physucs, but I have the humility to admit God very likely knows more about His Creation than I do (even ME). Humility, however, is in short supply these days.



Thank you


Josiah




.

 

[Arsenios]

Now, in the Doctrine of the Two Natures of Christ,
there is "the communication of attributes"
which means the divine "communicates" with the human/flesh
but not generally the other way around
(thus His flesh could be killed
but not God, for example;

His human nature may be ignorant of something
but not his divine).

This makes for some mind-numbing MYSTERY.

Josiah, if you keep thinking like this, you are running a great risk of becoming Orthodox...

True even of Christ prior to His Ascension, for He said to Mary Magdalene: ""Touch Me not, for I have not yet ascended to My Father..."

So that in this life, we are not physically perfected...

Although...

On occasion...

Christ did pass through the crowd bent on killing Him...

For His Time had not yet come...

So also Christ's Saints do things physically...

Being given an 'earnest' physically...

Mind-numbing Mystery indeed!


Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

I agree....



Two points, if I may...


1. Of course, Jesus is BOTH God and man.... God and flesh/blood.... .BOTH. ALWAYS. 100%/100%. INSEPARABLE. If God can be anywhere, so can JESUS. Now, in the Doctrine of the Two Natures of Christ, there is "the communication of attributes" which means the divine "communicates" with the human/flesh but not generally the other way around (thus His flesh could be killed but not God, for example; His human nature may be ignorant of something but not his divine). This makes for some mind-numbing MYSTERY. And yes, it seems our senses don't always preceive what is REAL. Rather than deny t he Divinity of Jesus and the "communication of attributes" as Zwingli (the first to deny Real Presence) did, we need to accept what Scripture says and BELIEVE - realizing we have a mystery here that our puny, fallen, human brains cannot understand. THAT'S Zwingli's mistake. He held that Jesus CANNOT be fully God AND man.... and thus Jesus CANNOT be in heaven and in bread/wine... thus Jesus and Paul were wrong when they (admittedly) said JESUS (not just the divine Second Person of the TRinity) IS here (He also denied that JESUS is with us, as He promised, because what He promised is impossible).


2. When Zwingli denied Real Presence (the first Christian in history to do so, in the 16th Century), he simply assumed that his concept of physics had to be correct and that God had to submit to it. He (who had never studied the subject AT ALL) just knew all about physics and sadly had to correct God who clearly didn't understand physics. Now, as one with a Ph.D. in physics, if we look at this from a 16th Century understanding of physics, he might have had a point. In fact, his point could stand perhaps into the 19th Century. But no longer. The GREAT, OVERWHELMING amount of "space" is in fact empty.... some 99% of an atom is empty, and it IS possible to put something there. And of course, there may WELL be many universes - side by side - occupying the "same space" (as our universe understands), and yes, it IS possible for them to interact (yup, some sci fi runs with this - I love Stranger Things, lol). Even science laity understands this... it IS current science (flowing in part from string theory). So, while Zwingli (who had NEVER studied physics AT ALL and was completely ignorant) denied what God said because God was the ignorant one when it comes to physics. Today, physics would be apt to say it's Zwingli who had a problem. Now, do NOT take this to mean some current concept in physics SUPPORTS Real Presence (no scientist is investigating the Holy Eucharist on this point, lol) ONLY that Zwingli's denials based on his misunderstanding of physics doesn't hold anymore.


I hold that it's better to believe Jesus than to tell Him, "I know more about physics than You do and You are WRONG there so I must deny what You clearly said and promised." Just as Zwingli did - with Jesus' promise that HE is with us always, and with His teaching that HIS flesh/blood is present. I may have the Ph.D. in physucs, but I have the humility to admit God very likely knows more about His Creation than I do (even ME). Humility, however, is in short supply these days.



Thank you


Josiah




.

Really?
Zwingli was the first Christian to believe Jesus wasn't calling for cannibalism when Jesus said "This is my body" and "this is my blood?"
Josiah, if you are correct, then Christians are cannibals. We devour human flesh and drink human blood. "Real presence."
Of course, we know from scripture that Jesus never cut off a chunk of his thigh to give it to the boys. Nor did he drain a pint of his blood from a cut vein and say "drink up."
But, you will just cower and say "mystery" as though that is a legitimate argument.
The mystery is that you promote cannibalism and think that God blesses your teaching.
So, the Apostles taught what Zwingli believed. The early church taught what Zwingli believed. Then...then came the State Controlled Churches who taught a mysticism of pagan spiritual power whereby being a cannibal would gain you the powers of God himself. And...if you didn't keep powering up and following the State Controlled Church, you would be damned and denied the power source that only the State Controlled Church could give you.
And you, you've bought it hook, line and sinker. You cannot for one moment consider that Jesus was speaking symbolically, even though his Apostles clearly knew he was changing the sedir meal and calling himself the Lamb of God.
So really, I reject your silly and unsupported Zwingli lie. It's your crutch to cling to the State Controlled Churches teaching.
God bless Zwingli and all who realize that "real presence" is a pipe dream propagated by the State Controlled Churches.

 

[Albion]

Really?
Zwingli was the first Christian to believe Jesus wasn't calling for cannibalism when Jesus said "This is my body" and "this is my blood?"
Josiah, if you are correct, then Christians are cannibals. We devour human flesh and drink human blood. "Real presence."

People who do not know what "Real Presence" means should consider posting on other threads instead.

 

[MennoSota]

People who do not know what "Real Presence" means should consider posting on other threads instead.

People who support real presence should not post about communion, but should post about cannibalism instead.

 

[Josiah]

Josiah, if you are correct, then Christians are cannibals. We devour human flesh and drink human blood. "Real presence."

Always laughable how your brain reduces everything to two possibilities ... one absurd and then there's YOUR view which becomes genius because the only other you will consider is absurd. You do that a LOT.


But you raise an interesting point since Christians have been accused of this by NON-BELIEVERS since the First Century. Why? Because every believer held to Real Presence (Zwingli's denial of the Two Natures of Christ was universal heresy then) And how did they reply? By going to your "only other" possibility? Jesus didn't tell the truth? Nope.




I doubt you'll watch this ... or even consider your presumptions might be wrong.... it's here for others.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD28OM1nV04

the Apostles taught what Zwingli believed.

Of course, you can't quote ANY Apostle teaching what Zwingli did on this. And the reason is obvious.




.

 

[Albion]

People who support real presence should not post about communion, but should post about cannibalism instead.

I'm against cannibalism and in favor of Real Presence.

Obviously, you cannot understand how that can be.

 

[MennoSota]

Always laughable how your brain reduces everything to two possibilities ... one absurd and then there's YOUR view which becomes genius because the only other you will consider is absurd. You do that a LOT.


But you raise an interesting point since Christians have been accused of this by NON-BELIEVERS since the First Century. Why? Because every believer held to Real Presence (Zwingli's denial of the Two Natures of Christ was universal heresy then) And how did they reply? By going to your "only other" possibility? Jesus didn't tell the truth? Nope.




I doubt you'll watch this ... or even consider your presumptions might be wrong.... it's here for others.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD28OM1nV04






Of course, you can't quote ANY Apostle teaching what Zwingli did on this. And the reason is obvious.




.

Nah. Only State Controlled Churches taught the cannibal view you embrace.

 

[MennoSota]

I'm against cannibalism and in favor of Real Presence.

Obviously, you cannot understand how that can be.

I understand how your State Controlled Church has mucked it up so you don't see the obvious contradiction.