Would you recognize the words of God?

[Paklek]

Speaking of God, would you recognize it to be the words of God if it came from the most unlikly of physical sources?

This thought I find quite interesting when thinking about your lord Jesus Christ. As he tried to speak the words of God to the people of Israel. But it ends up being slit into two camps, one which recognize him, one which not.

I've got an answer by christians before and that is there will be signs, just like the signs the jewish people failed to see?

To be honest I think if he was in the world today, he could easily pass you by preaching without you recognize it to be the words of God, being God.

 

[bling]

Christ is here and living in and through true Christians.

Christ’s words and actions (Both are extremely Lovingly motivated) are easily rejected since most people do not like to humbly accept charity.

 

[paul1149]

God's voice is not always obvious. This is why 1Thessalonians 5.20-21 tells us to test everything and then hold fast to what is fine. 1Jn 4.1-3 echoes this. Elsewhere Paul says not to judge anything before its time.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Speaking of God, would you recognize it to be the words of God if it came from the most unlikly of physical sources?

This thought I find quite interesting when thinking about your lord Jesus Christ. As he tried to speak the words of God to the people of Israel. But it ends up being slit into two camps, one which recognize him, one which not.

I've got an answer by christians before and that is there will be signs, just like the signs the jewish people failed to see?

To be honest I think if he was in the world today, he could easily pass you by preaching without you recognize it to be the words of God, being God.

When you say "there will be signs" are you referring to Jesus' coming back? Or what?

As for the rest, we do believe Jesus is in the world today. In fact every time I go up for the Lord's Supper I receive Jesus Christ "in and under" the form of bread and wine. That's actually Jesus Himself, His flesh and blood, the same born of Mary's womb, the same whose hands and feet were pierced, and who was raised up, and now sits at the right hand of God, bodily.

Word and Sacrament is Christ truly for us, with us, even now. Not in some spiritualized, nice sentimental sense; but the flesh, blood, and bone Person Himself, the historic, real Jesus of Nazareth.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Paklek]

Christ is here and living in and through true Christians.

Christ’s words and actions (Both are extremely Lovingly motivated) are easily rejected since most people do not like to humbly accept charity.

By that you mean hes teachings?

God's voice is not always obvious. This is why 1Thessalonians 5.20-21 tells us to test everything and then hold fast to what is fine. 1Jn 4.1-3 echoes this. Elsewhere Paul says not to judge anything before its time.

Thank you Paul.

When you say "there will be signs" are you referring to Jesus' coming back? Or what?

As for the rest, we do believe Jesus is in the world today. In fact every time I go up for the Lord's Supper I receive Jesus Christ "in and under" the form of bread and wine. That's actually Jesus Himself, His flesh and blood, the same born of Mary's womb, the same whose hands and feet were pierced, and who was raised up, and now sits at the right hand of God, bodily.

Word and Sacrament is Christ truly for us, with us, even now. Not in some spiritualized, nice sentimental sense; but the flesh, blood, and bone Person Himself, the historic, real Jesus of Nazareth.

-CryptoLutheran

Yes I'm referring to God in human form present on earth, that's after all how you percieve Jesus isnt it?

As to the rest, I don't mean to be rude but that does sound jibberish to me. Mind to elaborate?

 

[Sketcher]

Yes I'm referring to God in human form present on earth, that's after all how you percieve Jesus isnt it?

Wont' happen, when Jesus comes back, it will be in the clouds, in great power. His coming will be more globally recognizable than a nuclear explosion when it happens.

 

[Paklek]

Wont' happen, when Jesus comes back, it will be in the clouds, in great power. His coming will be more globally recognizable than a nuclear explosion when it happens.

I understand you saying that, that doesnt mean you cant play with the thought though. Would you recognize Jesus if you spent time with him and there were no such entry?

 

[paul1149]

I understand you saying that, that doesnt mean you cant play with the thought though. Would you recognize Jesus if you spent time with him and there were no such entry?

There have been some excellent attempts to show Jesus coming back and interacting with people. My faves are the book Joshua, by Joe Girzone, also a movie though much different and generally not as good; The Perfect Stranger, a movie by Jefferson Moore that is an adaptation of the book, Dinner With a Perfect Stranger (and there's also a sequel); and The Encounter, a movie.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Yes I'm referring to God in human form present on earth, that's after all how you percieve Jesus isnt it?

Yes, we believe Jesus was and is both God and man.

As to the rest, I don't mean to be rude but that does sound jibberish to me. Mind to elaborate?

Traditional Christian teaching is that the Eucharist (Lord's Supper, Holy Communion, whatever you want to call it) is not merely some religious ritual involving bread and wine, but that it is actually Jesus Christ Himself, the bread is His actual body and the wine His actual blood.

There are different ways that is understood, the most well known is the Roman Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation. I'm a Lutheran, and so I don't believe in Transubstantiation.

The Lutheran view is sometimes called "the Sacramental Union", by analogy saying that in the same way that Jesus was both fully God and fully man, so is the Eucharist both fully Jesus body and blood and fully bread and wine. That means it's very much ordinary, plain, run-of-the-mill bread and wine. Put it under a microscope and you won't find anything but bread and wine. And yet, we believe by faith, that it is also Jesus Christ, actually Jesus, the bodily, tangible, Jesus Christ.

How this is possible is an unexplainable mystery, and so we don't concern ourselves with trying to make it make sense. We just believe it because Jesus, at the Last Supper, said, "This is My body" and "This is My blood". So we take it to be true, and it's what Christians have literally always believed.

This idea of Christ being present in Word and Sacrament is also understood in that when we hear the Gospel being preached, it is Christ Himself who speaks to us. When the pastor says, "Your sins are forgiven" he is speaking in the stead of Christ, it is Christ who says this, and Christ's authority.

And likewise, in Baptism we are taken by God and joined to Jesus, His death and resurrection. That isn't mere sentimentality. It's reality, when that water is applied this human person is drowned in Christ, and lifted up together with Jesus into Jesus own unique victory over death with the hope that, on the Last Day, I too will be raised from the dead (bodily) to eternal life with God.

These are the sorts of ways that we understand, as Christians, that Jesus means when He says, "See, I am with you always, even until the end of time". That even though after He was raised from the dead, and then was taken bodily up to the right hand of God, where He lives and reigns even now, He is not truly gone from us. He is with us, with us all, speaking to us in the Gospel, washing us with Himself in Baptism, feeding us Himself in His Supper. Christ is entirely and wholly present throughout the Christian Church, speaking to us, dwelling with us, holding us together with Himself.

So for us it's not a matter of whether we'd recognize Jesus if He were alive on earth today, because we already do. He is alive, through His Church, in His Word, in His Sacraments, here in the midst of the world even now, right now. Even until He comes again on the last day.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Paklek]

There have been some excellent attempts to show Jesus coming back and interacting with people. My faves are the book Joshua, by Joe Girzone, also a movie though much and generally not as good; The Perfect Stranger, a movie by Jefferson Moore that is an adaptation of the book, Dinner With a Perfect Stranger (and there's also a sequel); and The Encounter, a movie.

Thanks man! Is it about what i speak of, not recognizing Jesus?

Yes, we believe Jesus was and is both God and man.

Traditional Christian teaching is that the Eucharist (Lord's Supper, Holy Communion, whatever you want to call it) is not merely some religious ritual involving bread and wine, but that it is actually Jesus Christ Himself, the bread is His actual body and the wine His actual blood...[less]

Thanks for effort in explaining to me how you see it, I appreciate it! Do you also take the teachings of christ literal?

 

[paul1149]

Thanks man! Is it about what i speak of, not recognizing Jesus?

There's a lot of that in the first two, especially in the second one it's front and center.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Thanks for effort in explaining to me how you see it, I appreciate it! Do you also take the teachings of christ literal?

Define "literal".

Do I believe that when Jesus says it is better that a man pluck out his eye if it causes him to sin that people should go around removing their eyeballs? No.

Do I believe that when Jesus says, "I am the vine, you are the branches" that He is composed of chloroplasts and hangs off of buildings? No.

But it does mean that when He says, "I and My Father are one" and "Love your enemy" and "Pray for those who persecute you" etc that He means what He says.

So I don't know, is that taking Jesus literally? I think it's just taking Jesus seriously.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Paklek]

Define "literal".

Do I believe that when Jesus says it is better that a man pluck out his eye if it causes him to sin that people should go around removing their eyeballs? No.

Do I believe that when Jesus says, "I am the vine, you are the branches" that He is composed of chloroplasts and hangs off of buildings? No.

But it does mean that when He says, "I and My Father are one" and "Love your enemy" and "Pray for those who persecute you" etc that He means what He says.

So I don't know, is that taking Jesus literally? I think it's just taking Jesus seriously.

-CryptoLutheran

Well, I don't see any diffrence in vine, bread or wine. So I do think you're taking it literal when saying, "the bread is His actual body and the wine His actual blood.".

He was a messanger of god, not bread nor wine. I do think you understand it's not meant literal, just as vine. A mere command to digest hes teachings, become one with it.

But that's just my thought and I do think this is turning more into a debate. And I'm not sure if this is the place to do so.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Well, I don't see any diffrence in vine, bread or wine. So I do think you're taking it literal when saying, "the bread is His actual body and the wine His actual blood.".

He was a messanger of god, not bread nor wine. I do think you understand it's not meant literal, just as vine. A mere command to digest hes teachings, become one with it.

But that's just my thought and I do think this is turning more into a debate. And I'm not sure if this is the place to do so.

The way we traditionally approach this is thus:

Jesus says, "I am the vine", He does not take a grapevine and say, "This vine is Me".

Jesus takes bread and wine and says, "This is Me".

In the case of "I am the vine" Jesus is speaking in the abstract, there's no concrete vine that He's identifying with Himself. But at the Last Supper He does take a real, concrete loaf of bread and say "This is My body" and takes a real cup of wine and says "This is My blood".

Thus the distinction is between the concrete and the abstract. When Jesus says He is the "bread of life" that is an analogous abstraction of bread as nourishment. But no such analogue or abstraction happens in "This is My body", there is no abstract "body" to which to attach to this concrete bread; there are two concrete realities, His body and the bread, and those concrete realities are identified together.

It isn't arbitrary picking and choosing to read some statements as literal and some as non-literal. It's about understanding analogous, abstract, and concrete language. Christianity has always maintained that by saying "This is My body", in identifying with the concrete reality of bread the concrete reality of His body, there is a reception of the real body in the real bread.

What is also attached to this Supper is "for the remembrance of Me", that is, anamnesis in Greek. Anamnesis is not mere mental recall, it is a participatory act.

At the Jewish Passover Seder, the Haggadah contains the "Four Questions" "Why is this night different from all other nights", the response to the questions begins, "We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt, and God brought us out with a strong hand and an outstretched arm."

There is a living participation of the present with the past, the deliverance of the Jews from Egypt is not merely an event God did for the ancestors, but for all Jews, there is a corporate participation of the present generation with the past and with all generations.

In a similar way the Christian Eucharist is an anamnesis, a living remembrance, by which we share and partake of Christ's death and suffering. In the bread and wine is the body and blood of Jesus, and we share with Him in His death and suffering, and because He is risen, we share in His rising as well. This is what St. Paul indicates by saying "the bread ... is a participation in the body of Christ" and "the cup ... is a participation in the blood of Christ", and speaks of those who partook of the offerings of the altar share in its sacrifice; by our eating and drinking we partake of Christ and what Christ has done. It is a living reality, of the crucified and risen Jesus present with us in such lowly elements such as bread and wine.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Paklek]

The way we traditionally approach this is thus:

Jesus says, "I am the vine", He does not take a grapevine and say, "This vine is Me".

Jesus takes bread and wine and says, "This is Me".

In the case of "I am the vine" Jesus is speaking in the abstract, there's no concrete vine that He's identifying with Himself. But at the Last Supper He does take a real, concrete loaf of bread and say "This is My body" and takes a real cup of wine and says "This is My blood".

Thus the distinction is between the concrete and the abstract. When Jesus says He is the "bread of life" that is an analogous abstraction of bread as nourishment. But no such analogue or abstraction happens in "This is My body", there is no abstract "body" to which to attach to this concrete bread; there are two concrete realities, His body and the bread, and those concrete realities are identified together.

It isn't arbitrary picking and choosing to read some statements as literal and some as non-literal. It's about understanding analogous, abstract, and concrete language. Christianity has always maintained that by saying "This is My body", in identifying with the concrete reality of bread the concrete reality of His body, there is a reception of the real body in the real bread.

What is also attached to this Supper is "for the remembrance of Me", that is, anamnesis in Greek. Anamnesis is not mere mental recall, it is a participatory act.

At the Jewish Passover Seder, the Haggadah contains the "Four Questions" "Why is this night different from all other nights", the response to the questions begins, "We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt, and God brought us out with a strong hand and an outstretched arm."

There is a living participation of the present with the past, the deliverance of the Jews from Egypt is not merely an event God did for the ancestors, but for all Jews, there is a corporate participation of the present generation with the past and with all generations.

In a similar way the Christian Eucharist is an anamnesis, a living remembrance, by which we share and partake of Christ's death and suffering. In the bread and wine is the body and blood of Jesus, and we share with Him in His death and suffering, and because He is risen, we share in His rising as well. This is what St. Paul indicates by saying "the bread ... is a participation in the body of Christ" and "the cup ... is a participation in the blood of Christ", and speaks of those who partook of the offerings of the altar share in its sacrifice; by our eating and drinking we partake of Christ and what Christ has done. It is a living reality, of the crucified and risen Jesus present with us in such lowly elements such as bread and wine.

-CryptoLutheran

Would he really be the vine if he was standing next to a vine, putting hes hand on it and said those words? I'm sorry but I have to disagree with your way of thinking here, I see the last supper somewhat diffrent, as told. I find it to be inaccurate by saying the bread is hes ACTUAL body, the wine hes ACTUAL blood.

 

[Locutus]

There's a lot of that in the first two, especially in the second one it's front and center.

A great piece of dramatization of what MIGHT happen if God/Jesus returns, is a short lived tv series of about 10 episodes, titled "John from Cincinnati" I'm sure most Christians will get the JC reference, there. Anyway, I recommend it to anyone with the imagination to wonder how it might play out. And more importantly, how these figures might appear to us. I think that show has done more for modern Christianity than a hundred dusty old Hollywood "holier than thou" efforts.

If you DO watch it, and find yourself offended by the context, I humbly suggest you've fallen into the very trap Jesus urged us to avoid. No pressure

 

[theophilus777]

Speaking of God, would you recognize it to be the words of God if it came from the most unlikly of physical sources?

This thought I find quite interesting when thinking about your lord Jesus Christ. As he tried to speak the words of God to the people of Israel. But it ends up being slit into two camps, one which recognize him, one which not.

I've got an answer by christians before and that is there will be signs, just like the signs the jewish people failed to see?

To be honest I think if he was in the world today, he could easily pass you by preaching without you recognize it to be the words of God, being God.

What you overlook is the reaction of John the Baptist, even while still in his mother's womb. He lept for joy at the sound of the voice of Jesus' Mother! And so it is amongst believers. He knows them that are His, and He will tell us about it. There is no way He could pass through the crowd and go unrecognized, because we know Him.

The caveat here is that we must know Him.