How does it become the Body and the Blood?

[George]

You have been shown your claim is illegitimate and is a use of very poor hermeneutics. If you intend to butcher the Bible do it elsewhere.

If you intend to hijack topics, do it elsewhere or start a new topic and stop derailing topics from the on topic discussion.

 

[Particular]

So then you're saying it's a one and done, the Holy Spirit did it, so then it no longer needs to move. As far as your eluding to predestination is another matter, and no one said about being righteous. Your posts would be more respected if you did not come in hijacking topics and trying to bully everyone. And that's what we do, we pray that he will send down his Holy Spirit and change the Bread and Wine, so I don't see the issue.

I'm saying that God chooses to adopt us and then immerses us into Christ. We no longer live, but Christ lives within us.
God does the work. We don't coerce God by our actions. God chooses to be gracious to whomever he wills, not because that person first partakes in the communion table. Many partake in communion who have never been redeemed by God. The unredeemed receive no grace for participating.

 

[Particular]

If you intend to hijack topics, do it elsewhere or start a new topic and stop derailing topics from the on topic discussion.

We are still discussing your original question, are we not?

 

[George]

We are still discussing your original question, are we not?

The question was how does it change, not does it change at all.

 

[George]

I'm saying that God chooses to adopt us and then immerses us into Christ. We no longer live, but Christ lives within us.
God does the work. We don't coerce God by our actions. God chooses to be gracious to whomever he wills, not because that person first partakes in the communion table. Many partake in communion who have never been redeemed by God. The unredeemed receive no grace for participating.

No one said any of that. But people are denying the working of the Holy Spirit in Communion.

 

[George]

Who is denying that the Holy Spirit can work through communion? Nobody. Jesus said that the Spirit would remind the disciples about what Jesus did. So, the Spirit uses communion to remind us of Jesus and his sacrifice.

And it would remind them that Christ said that it was His Body and His Blood, not just symbolically.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

It’s quite sad to see a denial that the Holy Spirit can work through Communion, and rather just taken as some to be a little snack that they take once every month.

Haven't even read the rest of the replies, but watch this:

"Of course the Holy Spirit works through communion as he brings the faithful together in spirit to remember the sacrifice Christ made for us, just as Christ said at the Supper!"

Did I get it?

(ETA: I'm not saying this DOESN"T happen - but that just because it might, is not reason to believe it STOPS there)

 

[Josiah]

And it would remind them that Christ said that it was His Body and His Blood, not just symbolically.

I agree, George....


1 Corinthians 11:27-30 makes ZERO sense if Jesus and Paul were only using some symbol.... the CONTEXT too makes the "just a symbol" invention impossible.

"Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died."

Are these mandates and warnings found regarding foot washing or the Passover Meal or even circumcision? Are warnings and things like this mention about ANY mere symbol? Or about the Nike swoosh or the Mercedes Benz star? And why this huge issue of "discerning" the Body if there's no Body to discern?




.

 

[Albion]

I was reprimanded for saying your views are narrow _ _ _ _ _ _. Yet you show how narrow they are.
I only ask this of you. Interpret every word that Jesus ever uttered with extreme literalness. It is the only way that you can maintain your position on communion and have it be a legitimate argument.

Unfortunately, Jesus usually did not speak in a strictly literal manner.

Most of his advice, sayings, and so on were made with interior meanings included. Not all of them, of course. The Sermon on the Mount, for example, and when he gave his followers the Lord's Prayer do not seem to be that way.

But a host of other of his statements were NOT meant to be taken literally. These include the sayings that people seem to quote most often. We see this style of his through the number of times that questioners of Jesus or even his disciples were confused upon hearing his words.

 

[Particular]

No one said any of that. But people are denying the working of the Holy Spirit in Communion.

If by working of the Holy Spirit to save a person's soul, I declare that the Bible does not teach any such thing. Thus, communion is not a means of grace.

If by working of the Holy Spirit upon the elect child of God to honorably remember our King who died on our behalf, I fully endorse the work of God's Spirit in the child of God to bring us blessed remembrance.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

We pray during the Divine Liturgy that the Holy Spirit will descend and transform the Gifts.

How is "transform" understood in an Orthodox context?

*Note - Capital "O". If the respondent is not at least knowledgeable on Orthodoxy I request you not respond

 

[George]

If by working of the Holy Spirit to save a person's soul, I declare that the Bible does not teach any such thing. Thus, communion is not a means of grace.

If by working of the Holy Spirit upon the elect child of God to honorably remember our King who died on our behalf, I fully endorse the work of God's Spirit in the child of God to bring us blessed remembrance.

The servant of God (Name) partakes of the Body and Blood of Christ for the remission of sins and life eternal.

That is what is Communion is.

You’re talking about honorable remembrance, but we can remember Christ through so many other ways. The greatest commandment Christ said is to love, so I can remember Christ through that way cause I'm following His Commandments. And keeping in line with how His Nativity, His Crucifixtion, and His Resurrection were all very much physical and literal, why would the presence of His Body and Blood in Communion be any different?

 

[George]

How is "transform" understood in an Orthodox context?

*Note - Capital "O". If the respondent is not at least knowledgeable on Orthodoxy I request you not respond

During the Anaphora of the Divine Liturgy, this is what is said:

Once again we offer to You this spiritual worship without the shedding of blood, and we beseech and pray and entreat You: Send down Your Holy Spirit upon us and upon the gifts here presented,
And make this Bread the precious Body of Your Christ.
(Amen.)
And that which is in this Cup, the precious Blood of Your Christ.
(Amen.)
Changing them by Your Holy Spirit.
(Amen. Amen. Amen.)
So that they may be for those who partake of them for vigilance of soul, remission of sins, communion of Your Holy Spirit, fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven, boldness before You, not for judgment or condemnation. Again, we offer You this spiritual worship for those who have reposed in the faith: forefathers, fathers, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, preachers, evangelists, martyrs, confessors, ascetics, and for every righteous spirit made perfect in faith.

Within Orthodoxy, we do not seek to understand how the Gifts are changed, but it is at the point of Consecration which is what I mentioned above that we pray and know that the Holy Spirit changes the Gifts.

 

[Particular]

That is what is Communion is.

You’re talking about honorable remembrance, but we can remember Christ through so many other ways. The greatest commandment Christ said is to love, so I can remember Christ through that way cause I'm following His Commandments. And keeping in line with how His Nativity, His Crucifixtion, and His Resurrection were all very much physical and literal, why would the presence of His Body and Blood in Communion be any different?

Why would we need his flesh and his blood in a wafer and cup? The disciples didn't need it at the last Supper. Jesus didn't literally give them his flesh and his blood. Therefore, we don't need it either.
However, just as in the Passover meal, Israel remembered God's act of salvation, so in the communion meal we remember God's act of salvation.
Symbolism is a good and God directed thing that goes far back to the early days of Israel.
Jesus is not perpetually dying.

 

[George]

Why would we need his flesh and his blood in a wafer and cup? The disciples didn't need it at the last Supper. Jesus didn't literally give them his flesh and his blood. Therefore, we don't need it either.
However, just as in the Passover meal, Israel remembered God's act of salvation, so in the communion meal we remember God's act of salvation.
Symbolism is a good and God directed thing that goes far back to the early days of Israel.
Jesus is not perpetually dying.

No one said Christ perpetually dies. Please stop with the red herrings that you use, since you have no other means of supporting your false claims. And the difference from Passover versus the Last Supper, is that they remembered. With Christ and the Last Supper, Christ was the Passover Lamb and as such that’s why it was His Body and His Blood.

 

[Particular]

That is what is Communion is.

You’re talking about honorable remembrance, but we can remember Christ through so many other ways. The greatest commandment Christ said is to love, so I can remember Christ through that way cause I'm following His Commandments. And keeping in line with how His Nativity, His Crucifixtion, and His Resurrection were all very much physical and literal, why would the presence of His Body and Blood in Communion be any different?

Because Christ died once, not in perpetuity.

 

[George]

Because Christ died once, not in perpetuity.

I don’t think you pay attention to the thread, other than for you to continue to derail topics to spew your ideology.

It’s a shame to see that you view the Holy Spirit is limited in the work it can do.

 

[Particular]

I don’t think you pay attention to the thread, other than for you to continue to derail topics to spew your ideology.

It’s a shame to see that you view the Holy Spirit is limited in the work it can do.

You conclusion is wrong.
The answer to your topic is that there is zero elemental change in the bread and the wine. They remain bread and wine.
Thus, anything you assert outside of that fact is fallacious on your part.

Second, the Holy Spirit is in no way limited because He doesn't turn bread into human flesh or wine into human blood. However, humans demanding that the Spirit do such a thing reveals their control issues.

 

[George]

You conclusion is wrong.
The answer to your topic is that there is zero elemental change in the bread and the wine. They remain bread and wine.
Thus, anything you assert outside of that fact is fallacious on your part.

Second, the Holy Spirit is in no way limited because He doesn't turn bread into human flesh or wine into human blood. However, humans demanding that the Spirit do such a thing reveals their control issues.

Because you believe in limiting God and His Holy Spirit in how they can work. No control issues here, you just also show your inability think beyond your human capability, rather than looking through a spiritual lense.

 

[Particular]

Because you believe in limiting God and His Holy Spirit in how they can work. No control issues here, you just also show your inability think beyond your human capability, rather than looking through a spiritual lense.

Nope, because I read the Bible and see very clearly that God never says the bread becomes human flesh and the wine becomes human blood. In fact, every Jew would find such a thing appalling because it goes against God's law. Also, in Acts 15, the Jerusalem Council makes sure to tell people not to drink blood.
Therefore, you are adding a false teaching to the Bible and that is what I object to, not to God being Sovereign and having the right to do as He wills. God has that right. God just doesn't choose to do what you are claiming He does.