Search results

What does communion entail? Are churches, today, doing exactly what the first supper did? How exactly literal are you going to be, or do you pick and choose what you literally do? The fact is that today's churches don't literally perform the Lord's Supper. Instead, they symbolize what took...

Do you think your churches ceremony is an exact replica of the last supper or does it symbolize what took place?

I defend the argument. I believe the same cannot be said when the other person attacks the person rather than the argument. Perhaps you cannot distinguish between the two. I understand if you struggle with seeing the difference.

I take your comments personally. You are not talking about the topic, you are denigrating me. I can take it no other way. As for any actual argument in your post, I find no merit in your argument.

The Corinthians were actually eating an entire meal, not just a wafer and a shot glass of wine. They were partying and leaving out the poor who had nothing. They were being exclusive rather than inclusive of all believers (perhaps something for closed communion advocates to think about). They...

I understand what you accept. I think the argument that everybody else believed it isn't very strong. First, that's an assumption. You cannot actually prove it. Second, the large group of Jews in Jesus day had been taught falsely by Rabbi's who held to a faulty tradition. The text of scripture...

Jesus said "IS is NOT IS...?" Chapter and verse please.

Does is mean is in that verse? Is Jesus saying he's a living loaf of bread? Is Jesus saying any person who eats the bread loaf will never physically die? Is Jesus being uncompromisingly literal?

Great, you believe Christ. That is as it should be. Which means you don't believe what your church teaches since Christ didn't teach what your church teaches. I am happy you believe Christ. That is as it should be for all of us.

I believe Christ Jesus is really present always, both in the fellowship of believers and individually. Jesus told us that he would be with us always. I do not think Jesus was claiming the bread was his body or the wine was his blood as I have already explained.

I understand. You want your quasi version to be valid. Otherwise you wouldn't be arguing.

I read the article. Your position isn't truly real presence. It's a quasi version where is doesn't actually mean is.

I understand, which is why I don't consider your quasi position to be actual real presence. Is isn't actually is.

I the words of John Winger: "Just the facts, Jack!" [emoji16]

2/3 don't even believe their church teaching. Even they recognize that Jesus wasn't being literal.

US Christians have never suffered persecution. They fear having their manicures ruined. They just want Jesus to come back before God brings judgment so they can escape. In short, US Christians are self-centered wimps.

You are attempting to slice an atom. The survey is about Catholics, not Lutherans. Real Presence is Transubstantiation for Catholics. Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation are just poor reflections of themselves. The point is that not even Catholics believe it.

1. Nether do you for bread and wine becoming human flesh and human blood. 2. If the bread turns to flesh and the wine turns to blood (Real Presence) then it is cannibalism.

Sins are only forgiven of the elect, not of those who do not know God as their Savior. For the elect, sins are forgiven when we confess them (1 John 1:9). Neither communion nor baptism forgives sins simply by partaking in them. (Acts 2 is not saying baptism forgives sin. Peter is saying, Repent...

Do you see the legalism and lack of grace in your statement?