Why can't the bread & wine be the body & blood of the Lord?

[ImaginaryDay2]

I remember tests being done on Catholics to determine what happens when the Eucharist is received and then digested and there was no DNA available to show it was Jesus' body or evidence except that is was still bread. I, being Lutheran, believe in the real presence and don't know what to make of those test results and they should knock my faith down more but it doesn't!

I wondered if I should ask for tests of the stale tortilla crisps they were serving the other night (which was really weird...), but I didn't want to cause a stir. Usually they're right on top of things with the wafers.
I don't think there was enough wine in the world that could have softened that thing up. Hmmm... Maybe I could tell myself the tortilla crisp really wasn't a tortilla crisp...

 

[MoreCoffee]

I remember tests being done on Catholics to determine what happens when the Eucharist is received and then digested and there was no DNA available to show it was Jesus' body or evidence except that is was still bread. I, being Lutheran, believe in the real presence and don't know what to make of those test results and they should knock my faith down more but it doesn't!

No Catholic worth their salt expects Jesus' DNA to transfer to them after communion. That's such a carnal way to look at it. Kind of like complaining that if the bread is his body then why doesn't it taste, look, and smell like human flesh or that if the wine is Jesus' blood then why doesn't it taste, look, and smell like human blood.

 

[user1234]

AGAIN, friend, this thread is not about local customs of giving and receiving Communion. AGAIN, I don't have an opinion (or concern) about whether one is given and thus receives one-tenth of an ounce of bad grape juice in a cheap non-biodegradable plastic cup or 6 ounces of fine California wine in a million dollar chalice. AGAIN, I think no one is telling you boldly what customs are permissible and which aren't becAuse 1) This thread is not about that, 2) I doubt anyone here has any strong opinions about that.


Several here (and in other threads) HAVE shared the 3 common views of that Communion IS and what God gives in it. Some have defended their positions (and in one case, defended the position of others rather than his own denomination). Perhaps you want more "YOU ARE WRONG!!!" comments but I think mostly this has been a discussion simply of the views - and in some cases, why that position is held.







Check here: http://www.christianityhaven.com/sh...an-quot-is-quot-Catholic-Lutheran-Evangelical


And yes, I think some DO give reasons why they accept their view.




.

Yes, now I recall that thread, and the second post in it made the most sense.
And probably makes the most sense here, too.

If it was literally His body then how could they eat it when He was alive with them and now His body is transformed, He also said to the Jews that they had to eat His flesh and drink His blood btw[/QUOTE]
The most direct, cut and dried answer.

 

[Lamb]

Yes, now I recall that thread, and the second post in it made the most sense.
And probably makes the most sense here, too.

If it was literally His body then how could they eat it when He was alive with them and now His body is transformed, He also said to the Jews that they had to eat His flesh and drink His blood btw[/QUOTE]
The most direct, cut and dried answer.

How could most of what happened in the bible happen? That's the best answer to your question

 

[user1234]

Yes, now I recall that thread, and the second post in it made the most sense.
And probably makes the most sense here, too.

How could most of what happened in the bible happen? That's the best answer to your question

That leaves so much to just :dunno: Dunno.
Its a mystery. Dont question, just believe what we tell you.
Every religion does that. Check your brains and common sense at the door.

The real reason a machine-stamped wafer, or a loaf of bread, or a cup of juice, is not the actual body and blood of our Creator, Lord and Saviour, is because it isn't.

 

[Lamb]

What I'm suggesting is that instead of doubting Jesus, why not believe Him as the disciples did? The scriptures don't show them questioning him and weren't they very good at asking when they didn't understand?

 

[user1234]

What I'm suggesting is that instead of doubting Jesus, why not believe Him as the disciples did? The scriptures don't show them questioning him and weren't they very good at asking when they didn't understand?

I do believe Jesus. I believe He died for my sins, I believe He rose from the grave, I believe He's coming again, I believe He's King of kings and Lord of lords, I believe He loves me and saved me, and not just me but I believe He loves you and everyone and died for your sins too, and that whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ shall be saved.
There's so much more I believe from and about Jesus, but for time and space, that should suffice for now.
There's also a whole lot said and taught about Him that, in my opinion, we shouldnt believe, also.

I dont believe that two thousand years later the body and blood of the God and Saviour of us all is being machine-stamped, mass-produced, baked or fermented.
I believe salvation is a gift of His grace by faith, not by the physical ingestion of communion items like wafers, crackers, breads, wines, juices, etc.

 

[Rens]

No Catholic worth their salt expects Jesus' DNA to transfer to them after communion. That's such a carnal way to look at it. Kind of like complaining that if the bread is his body then why doesn't it taste, look, and smell like human flesh or that if the wine is Jesus' blood then why doesn't it taste, look, and smell like human blood.

So then you believe it's spiritual.

 

[Rens]

I do believe Jesus. I believe He died for my sins, I believe He rose from the grave, I believe He's coming again, I believe He's King of kings and Lord of lords, I believe He loves me and saved me, and not just me but I believe He loves you and everyone and died for your sins too, and that whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ shall be saved.
There's so much more I believe from and about Jesus, but for time and space, that should suffice for now.
There's also a whole lot said and taught about Him that, in my opinion, we shouldnt believe, also.

I dont believe that two thousand years later the body and blood of the God and Saviour of us all is being machine-stamped, mass-produced, baked or fermented.
I believe salvation is a gift of His grace by faith, not by the physical ingestion of communion items like wafers, crackers, breads, wines, juices, etc.

It's like baptism water. God uses something natural for the spiritual.

 

[Lamb]

I do believe Jesus. I believe He died for my sins, I believe He rose from the grave, I believe He's coming again, I believe He's King of kings and Lord of lords, I believe He loves me and saved me, and not just me but I believe He loves you and everyone and died for your sins too, and that whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ shall be saved.
There's so much more I believe from and about Jesus, but for time and space, that should suffice for now.
There's also a whole lot said and taught about Him that, in my opinion, we shouldnt believe, also.

I dont believe that two thousand years later the body and blood of the God and Saviour of us all is being machine-stamped, mass-produced, baked or fermented.
I believe salvation is a gift of His grace by faith, not by the physical ingestion of communion items like wafers, crackers, breads, wines, juices, etc.

So you don't believe that God could give Himself to you for communion? You don't see it as a possibility even though it's a more perfect communion than just remembering his death by eating crackers and drinking some juice.

In the Passover, the Hebrews were to consume the innocent lamb. There is a reason that Jesus chose the night of the Passover to institute Holy Communion. He is our innocent lamb and death will pass over us so we will have eternal life. Not by the eating but because of His sacrifice.

 

[user1234]

It's like baptism water. God uses something natural for the spiritual.

Sure. All the time. In symbolic representation, not in actuality.
Just like we're saved by what Jesus did for us, not in our water-baptism.
And it's Jesus' real body that was broken for us, His real blood shed for us, that saves us, not the partaking of bread and wine in a ceremony. As important as those things are, they are not replacements for the reality. But I know you know that.
But there's alot of confusing teaching out there on these issues.

 

[user1234]

So you don't believe that God could give Himself to you for communion? You don't see it as a possibility even though it's a more perfect communion than just remembering his death by eating crackers and drinking some juice.

In the Passover, the Hebrews were to consume the innocent lamb. There is a reason that Jesus chose the night of the Passover to institute Holy Communion. He is our innocent lamb and death will pass over us so we will have eternal life. Not by the eating but because of His sacrifice.

What does 'Give Himself to you in communion' even mean? It sounds so ..... Lofty. Like, what are you saying is happening as you're swallowing the crackers and juice, is there some sort of spiritual transformation taking place inside because of physical ingestion?
We take bread, we take wine, we use these symbols as a reminder that Jesus' real body was broken for us , His real blood was shed for us. It's a solemn memorial, as well as a joyous occasion, as we remember Him in a more intimate way, that He purposed in Himself to go to the cross for us, both collectively as His saved body of believers, and personally and individually.
Also, You seemed to contradict yourself with your last sentence, which I agree with.
It's what He did, not what we eat.

 

[Josiah]

Check here: http://www.christianityhaven.com/sho...an-Evangelical


.

Yes, now I recall that thread, and the second post in it made the most sense.

IMO, God's written words "trump" what "makes sense" to a few fallen, sinful, limited humans and how they wrap stuff around their puny brains (no disrespect to anyone implied..... compared to God, I have an IQ of zero). God's Truth in my opinion is not AT ALL, in any sense, dependent upon whether it "makes sense" to puny human brains. In MY opinion, God probably knows more about what He's talking about in Scripture than we do.

For 1500 years, Christianity embraced MYSTERY. Indeed, Scripture calls on us to be stewards of the mysteries of God..... not destroyers of mysteries, not to try to correct God or "fill in" what God left out. We are to protect and preserve MYSTERIES - what our fallen brains DON'T understand, CAN'T understand. For 1500 years (until the RCC and Zwingli both appointed self to make God make sense to them), all Christians simply accepted what Jesus said and Paul penned.... avoiding forcing God to "fit" our (often wrong) ideas of science, physics and human "logic"..... simply accepting that Jesus and Paul meant what they said and said what they meant, and if some don't fully understand that.... if the prevailing "science" theories of the day can't explain it all.... if self can't seem to wrap their sinful/fallen/extremely limited brains around it.... so what? That's OUR problem, not Gods, not Jesus', not Pauls, not Scripture, not Truth's. IMO, what God says simply trumps what makes sense to me. Especially when it comes to issues of physics because I only have a Ph.D. in Physics - and thus know NOTHING compared to God.



.

 

[user1234]

Hi Josiah
How can anyone today claim to know what all christians believed/accepted for the first 1500 years A.D. ?
Perhaps there were many who never even 'took' communion for a variety of reasons.
Who can know? I think since the beginning, christians embraced JESUS, not so much 'mysteries'.

Christians are saved by, believe in, and proclaim JESUS. He did what He did openly, we proclaim Him openly.
HOW God is 'In the beginning' is a mystery, sure.....
WHY God would save any of us sinners is a mystery, okay.....

But Jesus dying for our sins and rising from the grave, though it's a mystery HOW He did all He did, the fact THAT He did is not a really a secret or a mystery.
It seems like people are making a mystery out of something that needn't be.

Jesus body was broken and His blood was shed for us. The bread and wine symbolizes that in the sharing of communion supper. It's not really all that mysterious.
It's sacred, it's deep and meaningful and beautiful and wonderful.
And maybe it's hard to understand, hard enough on it's own, without adding some kind of transformation that's assumed to take place with the bread and wine, either while sitting on the table, or after an incantation, or during ingestion.

Maybe it's confusion over the mystery we're to proclaim.
We proclaim the mystery that the Creator of the universe took upon Himself human flesh, walked among us, went to the cross, paid for our sins, rose from the grave, gives us eternal life, loves us with an everlasting love, and on and on and wow yes what mysteries we proclaim!!!

But we're not proclaiming a mystery of transforming bread and wine.
The mysterious transformation is the one that took place when Jesus saved us and we became a new creation in Him, not the transformation of bread and wine.

 

[Josiah]

Hi Josiah How can anyone today claim to know what all christians believed/accepted for the first 1500 years A.D. ?

Virtually ALL the statements we have from Christians prior to the 16th Century were that Christ is present.... that is means is in all its usual and full meaning (NOT one of the about 1% of cases in the Bible where "is" refers to a metaphor or the 0% of the cases in the Bible where "is" means "changed from one reality into a different one via an alchemic transubstantiation"). ALL the known positions were that the meaning of is is is (as it is about 99% of the time in the Bible), so that Christ Body and Blood IS..... they are present in Communion.

Yes, people have always asked questions.... I don't think anyone claimed to understand the physics at work there.... they embraced this (like all Christian theology) as MYSTERY. The MYSTERY of the Eucharist, the MYSTERY of Real Presence. Sadly, Christians today often lack the humility to accept mystery at all.... lack the humility to just accept what Sripture says BECAUSE it does - and not because we've been able to re-write it in a way that "makes sense" to some - and therefore must be what Jesus MEANT to say (just didn't). There was a lot of egoism, a lot of pride, a lot of VERY high esteem for the brains of self that arose and caused a change in how some believed about all this...... since the (wrong) pre-science concepts of some fallible/sinful/limited people could not answer the MYSTERY, well.... it couldn't be true. And there arose a new view: Jesus could not have meant is as is, He must have meant to say "represents" "symbolizes."

Now, I admit - about 1% of the time in the Bible, is doesn't mean is. And of course, there ARE a couple of examples of that with Jesus (we're all aware of those). MY point was that not everyone now.... and as far as anyone knows, no one for the first 1500 years of Christianity accepted that Jesus and Paul didn't mean "is" here - "is" in the usual (roughly 99% of the time), full sense. The spin that Jesus and Paul meant REPRESENTS is a 16th Century invention, largely of a man named Zwingli (who denied the orthodox teaching of the Two Natures of Christ and thus believed Christ COULD NOT be present and thus is not - regardless of what the texts all say).

Now, again, IF you want to side with Zwingli and this 16th Century invention, that's okay. That IS one of the Eucharistic views now (albeit the least common and newest of them). I don't deny it's POSSIBLE, I just deny its necessary.

WHY God would save any of us sinners is a mystery

So you admit it is entirely, wholly IRRELEVENT if you (or anyone) can/does understand something, if you or anyone can explain something, can answer all possible question, can force the view of self to fit the popular philosophies or "science" theories or assumptions of fallen, sinful, limited people at any given time. IMO, God is right because God is right - not because what He places in Scripture agrees (or can be spun so as to seem to agree) with some Christian's own personal theories, questions, and scientific opinions at the time.

The bread and wine symbolizes that in the sharing of communion supper. It's not really all that mysterious.

Only because you destroyed the mystery, you simply set up your own opinions to trump what Jesus actually said... you know more than what He said. YES - if you change what He said to "This symbolizes...." then you probobly don't have a mystery because you simply changed the words to fit your own view. But of course, that's not what Jesus said or Paul penned. In all the Eucharistic texts, the word "symbol" or "represents" or "metaphor" never appear. You just essentially deleted what they so boldly said..... and replaced it with what you think/feel/believe. Mystery solved. But the words of Jesus were changed to do so....


I wonder.... just wonder.... where this ends? This "is" can't mean that if such leaves me not comprehending all of it in my own puny, limited, sinful, fallen human brain...... if I then can't answer all the questions I can ask? The Bibles says Jesus is risen. Maybe that's not actually true. The Bible says that Jesus is with us always. Maybe that's not actually true. The Bible says that Jesus is God. Maybe that's not true if I don't fully comprehend that and can answer all and every question any may ask about that. The Bible says Jesus is the Savior. Maybe that's not really the case? Seems to be quite a Pandora's Box. But whatever.... Such is the "box" modern man opened with his "I'm smarter than God" mindset.... God is required to agree with my "logic" and "theories" position. I "get" it.

maybe it's hard to understand, hard enough on it's own

Then why do that by dogmatically insisting it's a metaphor, not really true in any usual, full sense, not actually the case???? Why reject that the meaning of is is is because YOU can't understand how it could be so???

without adding some kind of transformation that's assumed to take place with the bread and wine, either while sitting on the table, or after an incantation, or during ingestion.

You are referring to ANOTHER 16th Century re-invention, ANOTHER case of rejecting the mystery and substituting a new pagan idea to destroy the mystery. Jesus no more say "transubstantiated" than He did "symbolizes". He said is.

And yes, Zwingli denied any full reality of the body and blood (because the meaning of is cannot be is and therefore these just aren't).... the Roman Catholic Church did the very same thing (being smarter than the texts) and denied the full reality of the bread and wine (because the meaning of is cannot be is and therefore these just aren't in any usual, full sense). BOTH are equal attempts to destroy and reject the mystery.... and change what Jesus said and Paul by inspiration penned. I don't agree with either of these 16th Century attempts.



I stand with what Jesus said. And what Paul by inspiration penned in these texts on Communion.... I stand with every known Christian for 1500 years (and a great many today).... I think Jesus very likely said what He meant and meant what He said. I believe that very likely, the meaning of is is is - as it is at least 99% of the time in the Bible. I believe that what Jesus meant by is is is. That what Jesus meant by body is body. That what Jesus meant by blood is blood. What Jesus meant by bread is bread. What Jesus meant by wine is wine. What Jesus meant by forgiveness is forgiveness. I see no TEXTUAL reason to believe otherwise. I see no reason why this is something God cannot do (God being too incapable and incompentent). Now...... with my Ph.D. in physics..... do I understand the physics of all this? No. Not at all, not a bit. I stand with 1500 years of Christian history.... it's mystery. Just like the Trinity. Just like the Two Natures Just like the inspiration of Scripture. Just like all of Christian theology. I reject that the Bible is wrong if my puny, sinful, fallen, limited human brain can't understand it and explain it and answer all my own questions. IMO, God trumps me. God very likely knows more about all this than I do. Or even all 7.3 billion people put together. But modern man has abandoned that..... God is subject to OUR brains/logic/scientific theories, modern folks insist. "Can't be!" seems to be the modern replacement for mystery. I realize that.




- Josiah



.

 

[Lamb]

What does 'Give Himself to you in communion' even mean? It sounds so ..... Lofty. Like, what are you saying is happening as you're swallowing the crackers and juice, is there some sort of spiritual transformation taking place inside because of physical ingestion?
We take bread, we take wine, we use these symbols as a reminder that Jesus' real body was broken for us , His real blood was shed for us. It's a solemn memorial, as well as a joyous occasion, as we remember Him in a more intimate way, that He purposed in Himself to go to the cross for us, both collectively as His saved body of believers, and personally and individually.
Also, You seemed to contradict yourself with your last sentence, which I agree with.
It's what He did, not what we eat.

The first Passover...was it real? Or was it symbolic?

 

[Cassia]

When Jesus took the bread, blessed it, broke it, gave it to disciples to eat saying this is my body it was not His actual body he was giving them but actual bread. He used the bread to symbolize His body to the disciples. His body was broken for us on the cross, releasing His life for us to participate in it. By participating in that released life we become the mystical Body of Christ.

1 Corinthians 12:27
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.
1 Corinthians 10:17
Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.
1 Corinthians 10:16
The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a sharing in the body of Christ?​

 

[user1234]

I stand with 1500 years of Christian history.... it's mystery.

You unfortunately are coming across as if you have 'THE proper' interpretation of scripture, and anyone else's is wrong, but I don't want to believe that's where your heart is.

Thousands, millions, do not believe they are literally eating Jesus, they do not believe machine-stamped little wafers are the literal body of our God and Saviour, in fact, many think the very idea is ludicrous, and it leans toward subtle suggestions of cannibilism, a rather repulsive idea, actually.

Many have little to no idea who a guy named Zwingli is, or was, and have no need or desire to know or adhere to many Roman Catholic teachings, despite their insistence on being the one true church or having a leader that IS THE representative of Christ on earth, (or at least, the best, closest one).

Nor do they adhere to many of the denominational interpretations and doctrines that many 'church members' are taught and adhere to.
That doesn't make them any less a christian, or mean that they throw away God'sWord in favor of their own logic or scientific theories, as you seem to accuse them of.

Many believe we are saved by God's grace through faith in Jesus, period, and believe that the sharing of communion done today is a way to show the Lord's death til He comes, period.

They don't take the idea that Jesus literally IS the wafer, any more than the roasted lamb literally IS the Passover, but represents it. Or that Jesus literally IS a door, but represents one. Or that His ppl literally ARE sheep, but the comparison should be clearly understood between sheep following a Good Shepherd, and believers following Jesus.

You may feel you're adhering to the first 15 centuries of teaching and church tradition, and that somehow the majority of believers in the last 500 years have got it wrong, that's your opinion if you want it, but setting yourself up as if others don't understand or care about God's Word because they don't agree with your position on what the communion bread and wine means is really ... unfair.

You say that you reject the idea that the bible is wrong because you cant understand or explain it, but that is a strawman. No one here ever suggested the bible is wrong, nor that you should claim it to be. No one proposed that idea. That's an unfair statement on your part.

Only that your interpretation that the bread and wine is literally the body and blood of Jesus might not be what Jesus meant. And there are many who would say so, not because of pre-conceived notions, modern science, or church traditions and councils, but by what the Holy Spirit reveals to them when they read the scripture passages in context, much the same as I would expect you faithfully hope to do as well. GBU

Hebrews13:1 Let brotherly love continue.

 

[user1234]

When Jesus took the bread, blessed it, broke it, gave it to disciples to eat saying this is my body it was not His actual body he was giving them but actual bread. He used the bread to symbolize His body to the disciples. His body was broken for us on the cross, releasing His life for us to participate in it. By participating in that released life we become the mystical Body of Christ.

1 Corinthians 12:27
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.
1 Corinthians 10:17
Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.
1 Corinthians 10:16
The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a sharing in the body of Christ?​

Okay, but except for the term 'His released life' (which I'm not quite understanding what you mean) I can agree with most of your post here, whole-heartedly!
And I'm sure Rens :hug: will be doing somersaults when she finds out, :=D: , :hearts:

But SYMBOLIZES I agree, yes, .....
but the BECOMING the mystical body of Christ THRU PARTAKING COMMUNION I'm still not getting. We are members of His body by His grace thru faith, being saved, not because of taking communion, as I read scripture.

IMO as I read scripture, I guess I better say.

 

[Lamb]

When Jesus took the bread, blessed it, broke it, gave it to disciples to eat saying this is my body it was not His actual body he was giving them but actual bread. He used the bread to symbolize His body to the disciples. His body was broken for us on the cross, releasing His life for us to participate in it. By participating in that released life we become the mystical Body of Christ.

1 Corinthians 12:27
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.
1 Corinthians 10:17
Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.
1 Corinthians 10:16
The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a sharing in the body of Christ?​

Don't be so quick to exclude Christ's body from being the body of Christ as well.