Communion of the Body of Christ

[Particular]

EXACTLY!


Either Jesus and Paul told the truth OR Zwingli was right and they did not (cuz to HIM what they said CANNOT be true).

Either "is" means real, exists, present (as every Christian for over 1500 years believed vis-a-via Communion) OR it means "not" as you hold. Either what follows the "is" is: BODY, BLOOD, BREAD, WINE, FORGIVENESS. Or "is" means "is NOT" and so they don't exist (but ODDLY, bread and wine do - go figure).

Either the words Jesus said and Paul penned are correct (IS.... BODY..... BLOOD.....BREAD..... WINE..... FORGIVENESS) or they aren't (and need to be corrected).

Either the words you claim ARE in the text or are NOT in the text (NOT, SYMBOLIZE, METAPHOR, SEEMS, WAS, CHANGE)






Again, please, pray tell, please embolden the word "BECOME" in the text.

Again, get out your dictionary (any dictionary, even a Baptist one) and look up the word "IS". Actually look it up (because I'm not sure you know the meaning of this word). There are a number of definitions. Look for this one: "Changed from one reality into a completely different one." If you find that definition, please give the reference. But I'm certain you won't do this because you KNOW that's not what the word means.

And what comes AFTER the "is?" IF the ONLY things were bread and wine, you'd have a point. But it equally states body.... blood.... forgiveness. So why does the "is" apply to the bread and wine but when it comes to the body, blood and forgiveness, the word "NOT" applies (and so in those cases, you declare Jesus and Paul incorrect and appoint you to correct them)?




.

This has nothing to do with Zwingli.
Either you take the passages entirely literally or you don't. I have expressed the legitimate contextual reasons for why I take Jesus and Paul's words to be figurative.
You claim to take them literally, but not really. You don't believe the bread really becomes Jesus flesh or the wine really becomes Jesus blood. So, you don't actually believe in real presence. You have a something other that you call real presence, but Roman Catholics disagree with.

 

[Josiah]

Either you take the passages entirely literally or you don't.

Either we accept the words Jesus and Paul stated (IS.... BODY.... BLOOD.... BREAD.... WINE... FORGIVENESS) are true and to be accepted. OR your parroting of Zwingli is correct and what Jesus and Paul said can't be true and it needs to be corrected with what you keep referring to (NOT.... SEEMS...... SYMBOLIZE)

You don't believe the bread really becomes Jesus flesh or the wine really becomes Jesus blood.

Because I don't join you in your conviction what what Jesus and Paul stated is wrong and needs to be corrected. IF Jesus or Paul had said "changed" I'll believe them. But as you keep proving, they didn't say that. You know that. We all do. You feel compelled to change what Jesus and Paul said, you insist on deleting the words they clearly stated and replacing them with words they did not. "Is" = real, present. "Is" does not mean "is not" or "changed"



Let's very carefully look at the Eucharistic texts, noting carefully the words - what Jesus said and Paul penned, and equally what they did not. What are the words THERE and the ones NOT there?


Matthew 26:26-29

26. While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body."
27. Then he took the cup (wine), gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
28. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
29. I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine (wine) from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom."


First Corinthians 11:23-29

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,
24. and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."
25. In the same way, after supper he took the cup (wine), saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."
26. For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
27. Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.
28. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.
29. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.


Underline each of the following words, count how often each occurs and whether each occurs after we read the word "is", after the consecration:

IS
BODY
BLOOD
BREAD
WINE/CUP/FRUIT OF THE VINE
CHANGE
BECOME
WAS
SYMBOLIZE
SEEMS
APPEARS
NOT
ACCIDENT
ARISTOTLE
ALCHEMY
TRANSUBSTANTIATION
CONSUME
DIGEST



There are three basic "takes" on this in modern Western Christianity..... Let's look at the earliest one:



REAL PRESENCE:


Real Presence IS:

1. Real Presence accepts the words of Jesus and Paul. Nothing added, nothing deleted, nothing modified. Just accepting and believing what Jesus said and Paul by inspiration penned. Nothing more, nothing less.

2. Real Presence accepts that the meaning of is is is. This means that we receive Christ's body and blood. What follows the "is" is. Really. Present. It's called "Real Presence."


Real Presence is NOT..

1. Real Presence is not a dogmatic denial of the words "bread" and "wine" AFTER the consecration as if we must take a "half real/half symbolic" interpretation of the text. It simply regards such as irrelevant. The point of Real Presence is the presence of CHRIST. It's not called, "The Denial of What Paul Wrote" because that's not what it is, it is the AFFIRMATION of what he penned and what Christ said: the body is, the blood is, CHRIST is present.


2. Real Presence is not a theory about anything or explanation regarding anything. It simply embraces what Jesus said and Paul penned. What they say is is. The HOW and the physics are left entirely alone (without comment, without theory), as "mystery."


3. Real Presence doesn't teach or deny any "change." The word "change" never appears in any Eucharistic text and thus Real Presence has nothing whatsoever to do with that. Rather, it embraces what it IS - because that does appear in the texts and seems significant. "IS" means is - it has to do be BEING, EXISTENCE, PRESENCE.


4. Unbelieving, pagan, haters of Christ tried to twist this into cannablism. But notice the word "consume" never appears in the text OR in this position; we RECEIVE Christ but not consume Him (in some physical, digestive way). But when Christians were falsely accused of this by ignorant haters of Christ, they did NOT reply "Oh, Jesus didn't mean what He said and Paul wrote wrongly, it's just Weber's White Bread and Welch's Grape Juice symbolizing some stuff." Nope. They said Real Presence.


Now, without a doubt, the faith and conviction raises some questions. But Real Presence has always regarded all this to be MYSTERY. How it happens, Why it happens - it doesn't matter. It is believed because Jesus said and Paul so penned by inspiration. For all Christians until Zwingli in the 16th Century, that was good enough. For most Christians today, it still is.



.

 

[Lamb]

This is pointless. I've told you numerous times that Sacraments are how God delivers forgiveness of sins to us. It is not a work we do to earn forgiveness. As long as you wilfully Co tinue to ignore what has been explained countless times, we'll keep going back and forth, but the conversation will not advance. You are unwilling to learn.

He doesn't understand what we mean by God using means to deliver something to His people. Throughout the entire bible there are examples!! Jesus used mud to heal a blind man. What did the mud do? Nothing. It's so simple.

 

[zecryphon_nomdiv]

Frustrating, isn't it? It is VERY hard to have a constructive conversation with one whose entire rubric is to just IGNORE/DELETE words he doesn't like and (to make it worse) INSERT/IMPOSE words never said - then mock the things HE imputed to others that they never remotely said and obviously don't believe.


This is how our friend rolls. He does that with the words of Jesus and Paul; he doesn't like IS.... BODY.... BLOOD.... FORGIVENESS... can't be true, so he just deletes them (easy). Then inserts a whole bunch of words into the text that HE feels Jesus SHOULD have said if Jesus was actually truthful and smart: NOT, SEEMS, SYMBOLIZE. Bread and wine exist after the "is" because HE feels that's true, but body and blood and forgiveness CANNOT exist after the "is" because that's just not truthful. My guess is when we get to other topics with him (Baptism especially.... but maybe monergism, the Two Natures of Christ and more) we'll get the identical thing: Jesus and Paul often misspoke.... he is just smarter..... he is the Divine Corrector for Jesus.

But this happens here too. Things NO ONE REMOTELY said are imputed to us.... things we DID say are entirely ignored. Is it a reading problem? Probably not. But it is frustrating.

Are we wasting our time? On him, maybe.... although who knows how the Holy Spirit might use what is presented to him! But when dealing with such a person (I'm no Dr. Phil but I chuck it up to insecurity), I look at it this way. I'm not here to convert or convince, I'm here to extend MUTUAL understanding. IF he had presented anything to defend his view, that might have been informative. And several here were quite articulate in presenting Real Presence (his pretense that he didn't understand is absurd, I know for a FACT that second graders have no problem because I didn't in my First Communion Class - and no one else in the class did either). But my posts.... they DID help me more clearly understand..... my reading the posts of others did help me. And who knows who ELSE is reading here (who maybe CAN read, lol). Not all participating in the thread are going to benefit.... but often some do!



Blessings!


- Josiah

He's here to argue, not learn, not discuss and not worth my time anymore.

 

[Arsenios]

Are churches, today, doing EXACTLY what the first supper did?

STRAW MAN Alert!!!

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 place, "in remembrance of Jesus."

Followed by the fallacy of the false alternative...


Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

So, your churches perform a sedir meal?
That is what happened in the upper room as Passover was being remembered.

Straw man continuation...

Christ did not command that we do a Sedir meal...

But that we do as He did when He Took, Blessed and Brake the Bread...

That Taking and Blessing and Breaking of the Bread and the Blessing of the Wine was done in ONE manner by ALL the Apostolic Churches for the first thousand years of the Faith of Christ on earth, and is STILL so being done by the Orthodox Churches in that same manner...

It is best for us all to acknowledge that we are remembering the Lord's death, burial and resurrection until his return.

We all acknowledge His Death, Burial, and Resurrection...

And it is IN this remembrance that we obey His Commandment...


Arsenios

 

[zecryphon_nomdiv]

He doesn't understand what we mean by God using means to deliver something to His people. Throughout the entire bible there are examples!! Jesus used mud to heal a blind man. What did the mud do? Nothing. It's so simple.

So simple a child could understand it.

 

[Arsenios]

I claim the Apostles teach my position.

That IS means IS NOT???

Aaaallllllrightythen!!

I seem to remember Christ saying: "Let your YES be yes, and your NO no..."

Not that it matters is IS means IS NOT...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

Josiah, in your world, real does not mean real.
Now, either Jesus body and blood are really present in the elements of the bread and wine or they are not really present.
You try to straddle a nebulous world where real doesn't mean real. Real only means it's mysterious and somehow the bread and wine don't really become flesh and blood, but the essence of it is mysteriously present in the elements. So, for you, real presence doesn't actually mean real presence. It means mysteriously present, but not really present. It's an odd twisting of the scripture so as not to take the passages literally and not to take them figuratively. Alas, it is a mystery.

Think REAL MYSTERY

Or are you arguing that the Mystery of the Faith is NOT REAL???


Arsenios

 

[Particular]

Either we accept the words Jesus and Paul stated (IS.... BODY.... BLOOD.... BREAD.... WINE... FORGIVENESS) are true and to be accepted. OR your parroting of Zwingli is correct and what Jesus and Paul said can't be true and it needs to be corrected with what you keep referring to (NOT.... SEEMS...... SYMBOLIZE)







Because I don't join you in your conviction what what Jesus and Paul stated is wrong and needs to be corrected. IF Jesus or Paul had said "changed" I'll believe them. But as you keep proving, they didn't say that. You know that. We all do. You feel compelled to change what Jesus and Paul said, you insist on deleting the words they clearly stated and replacing them with words they did not. "Is" = real, present. "Is" does not mean "is not" or "changed"



Let's very carefully look at the Eucharistic texts, noting carefully the words - what Jesus said and Paul penned, and equally what they did not. What are the words THERE and the ones NOT there?


Matthew 26:26-29

26. While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body."
27. Then he took the cup (wine), gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
28. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
29. I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine (wine) from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom."


First Corinthians 11:23-29

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,
24. and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."
25. In the same way, after supper he took the cup (wine), saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."
26. For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
27. Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.
28. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.
29. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.


Underline each of the following words, count how often each occurs and whether each occurs after we read the word "is", after the consecration:

IS
BODY
BLOOD
BREAD
WINE/CUP/FRUIT OF THE VINE
CHANGE
BECOME
WAS
SYMBOLIZE
SEEMS
APPEARS
NOT
ACCIDENT
ARISTOTLE
ALCHEMY
TRANSUBSTANTIATION
CONSUME
DIGEST



There are three basic "takes" on this in modern Western Christianity..... Let's look at the earliest one:



REAL PRESENCE:


Real Presence IS:

1. Real Presence accepts the words of Jesus and Paul. Nothing added, nothing deleted, nothing modified. Just accepting and believing what Jesus said and Paul by inspiration penned. Nothing more, nothing less.

2. Real Presence accepts that the meaning of is is is. This means that we receive Christ's body and blood. What follows the "is" is. Really. Present. It's called "Real Presence."


Real Presence is NOT..

1. Real Presence is not a dogmatic denial of the words "bread" and "wine" AFTER the consecration as if we must take a "half real/half symbolic" interpretation of the text. It simply regards such as irrelevant. The point of Real Presence is the presence of CHRIST. It's not called, "The Denial of What Paul Wrote" because that's not what it is, it is the AFFIRMATION of what he penned and what Christ said: the body is, the blood is, CHRIST is present.


2. Real Presence is not a theory about anything or explanation regarding anything. It simply embraces what Jesus said and Paul penned. What they say is is. The HOW and the physics are left entirely alone (without comment, without theory), as "mystery."


3. Real Presence doesn't teach or deny any "change." The word "change" never appears in any Eucharistic text and thus Real Presence has nothing whatsoever to do with that. Rather, it embraces what it IS - because that does appear in the texts and seems significant. "IS" means is - it has to do be BEING, EXISTENCE, PRESENCE.


4. Unbelieving, pagan, haters of Christ tried to twist this into cannablism. But notice the word "consume" never appears in the text OR in this position; we RECEIVE Christ but not consume Him (in some physical, digestive way). But when Christians were falsely accused of this by ignorant haters of Christ, they did NOT reply "Oh, Jesus didn't mean what He said and Paul wrote wrongly, it's just Weber's White Bread and Welch's Grape Juice symbolizing some stuff." Nope. They said Real Presence.


Now, without a doubt, the faith and conviction raises some questions. But Real Presence has always regarded all this to be MYSTERY. How it happens, Why it happens - it doesn't matter. It is believed because Jesus said and Paul so penned by inspiration. For all Christians until Zwingli in the 16th Century, that was good enough. For most Christians today, it still is.



.

So it is the real flesh and real blood of Jesus. That is real presence. Write a book trying to say something else and you will have a book that is wrong.
Real presence means real flesh and real blood.
What Lutherans prescribe is something else.

 

[Particular]

Straw man continuation...

Christ did not command that we do a Sedir meal...

But that we do as He did when He Took, Blessed and Brake the Bread...

That Taking and Blessing and Breaking of the Bread and the Blessing of the Wine was done in ONE manner by ALL the Apostolic Churches for the first thousand years of the Faith of Christ on earth, and is STILL so being done by the Orthodox Churches in that same manner...




We all acknowledge His Death, Burial, and Resurrection...

And it is IN this remembrance that we obey His Commandment...


Arsenios

Correct. He just said "do this in remembrance of me." Paul confirms it.
No real human flesh. No real human blood. Just, "do this in remembrance of me."

 

[Particular]

Think REAL MYSTERY

Or are you arguing that the Mystery of the Faith is NOT REAL???


Arsenios

That is empty talk and of no value to the conversation. If you wish to dump it into the mystery bin, go ahead, but that doesn't address real presence. It means you haven't got a clue and you are okay with that.

 

[Lamb]

So it is the real flesh and real blood of Jesus. That is real presence. Write a book trying to say something else and you will have a book that is wrong.
Real presence means real flesh and real blood.
What Lutherans prescribe is something else.

You can't come to a forum and tell a denomination what it believes because you don't grasp what they actually do believe. So just stop.

 

[Josiah]

He just said "do this in remembrance of me." Paul confirms it. Just, "do this in remembrance of me."

No. He did NOT just say that.

Try something. I KNOW this is really hard for you, but I very much encourage you to TRY. I strongly suspect if you do this, not only will a stunning epiphany fall upon your but instantly, Real Presence will be as clear as it is to everyone else. Try to read the texts. But (here's what I think is difficult for you), actually read the actual words that are present (I know you really struggle with that word) - pay no attention whatsoever to any words anywhere that aren't there. Understood? It's really not so hard. Give it a try!



Matthew 26:26-29

26. While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body."
27. Then he took the cup (wine), gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
28. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
29. I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine (wine) from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom."


First Corinthians 11:23-29

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,
24. and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."
25. In the same way, after supper he took the cup (wine), saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."
26. For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
27. Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.
28. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.
29. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.


Notice....


1. There's a LOT MORE words here that "just in remembrance of me." Count all the other words! Notice them! Pay attention to them! They are EQUALLY as important!


2. Notice that none of the following word appear ANYWHERE: Not.... seems like..... symbolize..... change..... transform..... kinda.....


3. Notice the word "is." Get out your dictionary and look up the word. You will NOT find a definition of it as, "changed from one reality INTO a completely different one." Nor will you find a definition of it as, "Not." Give it a try!


4. Notice what EQUALLY follows the "is". It's NOT "just remember" and it's NOT "just bread and wine." Notice, it's body, blood, bread, wine, forgiveness, remember.


5. Notice that it's possible for this to be to one's judgement. The Bible talks about people getting sick and dying because they were amiss in regard to Communion. If you are right and the only words here are "just remember" or your earlier commend that the only thing that is is the bread and wine, well.... how does bread and wine cause people to get sick and die? Why JUDGEMENT upon those who receive bread and wine? Think of circumcision in the OT. Okay a symbol. But where is any promise attached to it? Where is there any stern warning issued about it? Or ANY symbol ANYWHERE in the Bible? Can you think of ANY mere symbol in the Bible that has a WARNING associated with it (say death) if it is not understood properly?





.

 

[Particular]

You can't come to a forum and tell a denomination what it believes because you don't grasp what they actually do believe. So just stop.

Real presence means real presence. Real human flesh and real human blood.
If you don't want real then stop using the term real when you talk about presence. Call it spiritually real presence if you wish, but acknowledge that for Lutherans, is does not literally mean is.

 

[Particular]

No. He did NOT just say that.

Try something. I KNOW this is really hard for you, but I very much encourage you to TRY. I strongly suspect if you do this, not only will a stunning epiphany fall upon your but instantly, Real Presence will be as clear as it is to everyone else. Try to read the texts. But (here's what I think is difficult for you), actually read the actual words that are present (I know you really struggle with that word) - pay no attention whatsoever to any words anywhere that aren't there. Understood? It's really not so hard. Give it a try!

Both these verses say "do this in remembrance of me." The Bible agrees with me. Jesus said it and Paul repeated it.

And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
~ Luke 22:19

and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is foryou. Do this in remembrance of me.”
~ 1 Corinthians 11:24

 

[Lamb]

Real presence means real presence. Real human flesh and real human blood.
If you don't want real then stop using the term real when you talk about presence. Call it spiritually real presence if you wish, but acknowledge that for Lutherans, is does not literally mean is.

I believe in Real Presence so please stop telling me that I do not. You're not adding anything to this conversation and you haven't added any proof that there is a metaphor being spoken by Jesus. The only reason you're persisting is because you want to have the last word in this discussion. I know you.

 

[Particular]

Real presence is very clear.
The bread really becomes Jesus human flesh. The wine really becomes Jesus human blood.
Hence the term: real presence.

Why people try to twist it into something else where real isn't really real is what is not clear.

 

[Particular]

I believe in Real Presence so please stop telling me that I do not. You're not adding anything to this conversation and you haven't added any proof that there is a metaphor being spoken by Jesus. The only reason you're persisting is because you want to have the last word in this discussion. I know you.

You believe in your church dogma regarding what real presence is. I'm saying that view is not actually real presence. It is something other. Some view where real isn't actually real.

 

[Josiah]

The bread really becomes Jesus human flesh. The wine really becomes Jesus human blood.

You have a hard time with words, don't you? No. NO ONE HERE has stated that the teaching of Real Presence is that anything changes into anything. I've personally told you that I suspect at least 30 times, but you seem to have a problem with words. SEEING the words there. You just delete the words there and insert words not there. NOWHERE did either Jesus or Paul ever so much mention in passing for nothing the word "CHANGE." Or symbol. Or not. Or just kidding.

IS means IS. It has to do with reality, presence, existence, truly. You have YET to produce any dictionary that defines the word "is" as "changed from one reality to another." No one here knows of that definition either.

TRY something! I think it might be a real epiphany for you! And will enable you to understand what every 8 year old in my First Communion class had no problem understanding.... Actually READ the texts. Not "JUST" one or two words and delete the rest. And try not to insert any words NOT there (such as "change" "become" "not" "sort of" "just kidding" "symbolizes") Give it a try! I think you CAN do it, if you will permit yourself to do so!


Matthew 26:26-29

26. While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body."
27. Then he took the cup (wine), gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
28. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
29. I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine (wine) from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom."


First Corinthians 11:23-29

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,
24. and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."
25. In the same way, after supper he took the cup (wine), saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."
26. For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
27. Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.
28. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.
29. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.


Notice some things...


1. There's a LOT MORE words here that "just in remembrance of me." Count all the other words! Notice them! Pay attention to them! They are EQUALLY as important!


2. Notice that none of the following word appear ANYWHERE: Not.... seems like..... symbolize..... change..... transform..... kinda..... just kidding.... I'm joking...


3. Notice the word "is." Get out your dictionary and look up the word. You will NOT find a definition of it as, "changed from one reality INTO a completely different one." Nor will you find a definition of it as, "Not." Give it a try!


4. Notice what EQUALLY follows the "is". It's NOT "just remember" and it's NOT "just bread and wine." Notice, it's body, blood, bread, wine, forgiveness, remember.


5. Notice that it's possible for this to be to one's judgement. The Bible talks about people getting sick and dying because they were amiss in regard to Communion. If you are right and the only words here are "just remember" or your earlier commend that the only thing that is is the bread and wine, well.... how does bread and wine cause people to get sick and die? Why JUDGEMENT upon those who receive bread and wine? Think of circumcision in the OT. Okay a symbol. But where is any promise attached to it? Where is there any stern warning issued about it? Or ANY symbol ANYWHERE in the Bible? Can you think of ANY mere symbol in the Bible that has a WARNING associated with it (say death) if it is not understood properly?





.