Christians are not vampires (i.e. They do not drink real blood at the Lord's Supper).

[Bible Highlighter]

I do not know what folks think what happens at the LORD's supper, but there is nothing magical that happens with the bread and the wine. It is still bride and wine when you consume it. The wine and the bread does not in any way change into blood and flesh literally. That doesn't make any sense. Who on Earth would teach such a thing? I can say I punch my chest and it can disappear so as to re-appear to float in the air above a crowd of people, but it would not be true unless I could actually prove it, though. Please tell me people do not really believe this. Do folks really believe they drink literal blood and eat literal flesh? Can we monitor you with Science equipment when this happens?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

So it should follow that men should shave their hair off entirely to be bald so as to avoid having any hair that covers them. Yes?

It refers to Christian belief int he Real Presence. When the Lord said, at the Supper, "This is My body" and "This is My blood", the Christian position throughout history has been to take Jesus at His word. The teaching that Jesus was only speaking figuratively, known as Memorialism, didn't exist until the 1500s when proposed by Ulrich Zwingli.

If you want to attack the Christian teaching of the Real Presence you should probably start another thread.

-CryptoLutheran

Well, I am a born again believer and I have studied the Bible for years and the Scriptures in no way are saying that the wine we drink will turn into actual physical blood.

#1. Christians are not vampires. Drinking blood is more in line with Satanism or vampirism.

#2. Drinking blood was forbidden in the Old Testament. Granted, we have a liberty in Christ to drink and eat what we like, but we also have to avoid having any appearance of evil, though. If folks think I am drinking blood, what sets me a part from the satanist or vampire want-a-be's?

#3. Jesus said you must drink of his blood and eat of his flesh in John chapter 6. Eating of his flesh was a reference Jesus just made in John chapter 4. Jesus said he has meat that they do not know about. His meat was to do the will of the Father. Drinking his blood is in reference to our belief in his blood that it can save us. For the Scriptures say, "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;" (Romans 3:25).

#4. Can we actually document this with Science equipment? Can folks show that "Transubstantiation" occurs at the LORD's supper? Or does it only work when nobody's looking?


...

 

[Albion]

#4. Can we actually document this with Science equipment? Can folks show that "Transubstantiation" occurs at the LORD's supper?

No, you can't and, no, they can't. The theory is that the change is real, literal, BUT that the incidentals (called the "accidents"--smell, taste, etc. plus such as laboratory testing) do not change.

 

[concretecamper]

#4. Can we actually document this with Science equipment? Can folks show that "Transubstantiation" occurs at the LORD's supper? Or does it only work when nobody's looking?


...

You cannot believe except for the eyes of faith....and taking Jesus at His word. Trans. is no more unbelievable than consubstantiation...or sacramental union or however some protestants attempt to square Christ's word in John 6.

 

[Albion]

You cannot believe except for the eyes of faith.

In other words, no, it cannot be proven scientifically.

 

[concretecamper]

In other words, no, it cannot be proven scientifically.

Umm....I think that is evident by my response.

 

[Jipsah]

I do not know what folks think what happens at the LORD's supper, but there is nothing magical that happens with the bread and the wine. It is still bride and wine when you consume it. The wine and the bread does not in any way change into blood and flesh literally.

You seem to be in disagreement with St.Paul. He allows as how:

1 Corinthians 11:27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

So if you eat and drink damnation to yourself by not discerning the Lord's body in the elements, how much worse is it to deny that the real presence of His body altogether? How can you discern what you adamantly insist is not there? Better you than me, hoss.

23For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

 

[Jipsah]

Well, I am a born again believer and I have studied the Bible for years and the Scriptures in no way are saying that the wine we drink will turn into actual physical blood.

So the Words of our Lord Himself don't impress you all that much, huh?

#1. Christians are not vampires. Drinking blood is more in line with Satanism or vampirism.

Read John 6 and explain to us how our Lord went wrong on this point. Surely He must have known better, since He is the one Who made the Law in the first place.

#4. Can we actually document this with Science equipment?

Nemmind what our Lord said and what St. Paul attested to, trust Science to lead you to spiritual truth.

Can folks show that "Transubstantiation" occurs at the LORD's supper? Or does it only work when nobody's looking?

Nah, it has to be taken on faith, and if you don't have any then there's no reason for further discussion. You either believe the Scripture or you don't.

 

[Hank77]

Read John 6 and explain to us how our Lord went wrong on this point. Surely He must have known better, since He is the one Who made the Law in the first place.

In my view...
The Jews that left Him did not understand Him. They thought He meant to literally eat and drink His body and His blood. That is why they left Him.
Key verse to understanding what the Lord was saying.

Joh 6:35 And Jesus said to them, `I am the bread of the life; he who is coming unto me may not hunger, and he who is believing in me may not thirst--at any time;

The one who comes to the saving knowledge of Him ate and will not hunger.
The one who believes in Him, believes the Gospel drank and will not thirst.

The apostles did not leave Him, they understood that He was all there was, there was no where else for them to go because they had come to Him and believed in Him. They had ate and drank.

Just like the Israelite Passover is to remember the Lord bringing His people out from the slavery of the Egyptians and into the promised land. The new covenant Passover is to remember the Lord bringing His people out of the slavery to sin and into the Kingdom of God.
In both cases that remembering is not taken lightly, seen as a common thing, but is a form of worship, of thanksgiving.

In all the types and shadows in the OT, I don't ever see the the eating of living flesh or the drinking of blood, rather it is forbidden.

 

[Rick Otto]

No, you can't and, no, they can't. The theory is that the change is real, literal, BUT that the incidentals (called the "accidents"--smell, taste, etc. plus such as laboratory testing) do not change.

I gotta love that.
It is a real change, BUT...

everything real about it doesn't change!

smh

 

[Rick Otto]

So the Words of our Lord Himself don't impress you all that much, huh?


No, Jipsah, your interpretation of them is dumbfounding, that's all.

Read John 6 and explain to us how our Lord went wrong on this point. Surely He must have known better, since He is the one Who made the Law in the first place.

Nemmind what our Lord said and what St. Paul attested to, trust Science to lead you to spiritual truth.

Nemmind what God given senses tell you, trust people ignorant of forms of speech to tell you what reality is.

Nah, it has to be taken on faith, and if you don't have any then there's no reason for further discussion. You either believe the Scripture or you don't.

You either use faith as a means to deny reality or you don't.

 

[Rick Otto]

In other words, no, it cannot be proven scientifically.

Because it is not scientifically true.

 

[Rick Otto]

Umm....I think that is evident by my response.

You must be posting to yourself.

 

[Albion]

I gotta love that.
It is a real change, BUT...

everything real about it doesn't change!

smh

I know.

But it's a foolproof theory, isn't it? Nothing can disprove it since it's stipulated in advance that nothing about it that we can apprehend is real. Christ intended to trick us...for better effect, apparently.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

The eucharist is a vehicle of a mystery, sacrament comes from a word that kind of sounds like mystery. I'd imagine understanding this rationally would be in the realm beyond quantum science. Some things can only be understood by experiencing them yourself. The real presence is one of those things.

The elements of communion are not the body of christ, but they contain the supernatural essence of the body of Christ, and it is the born again person who consumes it. However, the mystery as always is only accessible to those who believe in it. If you believe this is a ritual to be followed and that's it .. then that's all you get . there's some things that people need to learn through intimacy with the holy spirit .. no amount of reading will bring about an understanding that is out of the ordinary . it is experience.

 

[Albion]

The eucharist is a vehicle of a mystery, sacrament comes from a word that kind of sounds like mystery. I'd imagine understanding this rationally would be in the realm beyond quantum science. Some things can only be understood by experiencing them yourself. The real presence is one of those things.

The elements of communion are not the body of christ, but they contain the supernatural essence of the body of Christ, and it is the born again person who consumes it. However, the mystery as always is only accessible to those who believe in it. If you believe this is a ritual to be followed and that's it .. then that's all you get . there's some things that people need to learn through intimacy with the holy spirit .. no amount of reading will bring about an understanding that is out of the ordinary . it is experience.

None of that addresses the idea of Transubstantiation, however, and that was the focus of discussion, not the Eucharist in general, Real Presence, or mystery.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

None of that addresses the idea of Transubstantiation, however, and that was the focus of discussion, not the Eucharist in general, Real Presence, or mystery.

hmmm google says "(especially in the Roman Catholic Church) the conversion of the substance of the Eucharistic elements into the body and blood of Christ at consecration, only the appearances of bread and wine still remaining."

No, I think what I said does address it. It is the supernatural reality of anything that matters. For example, you may appear as you do according to the pattern of this world, but because you are born again you are more than you appear. You are no longer male or female, greek, jew, barbarian, scythian, slave or free, you are one with the body of Christ Jesus. In the truest sense of reality .. you are born again regardless of how you appear on the outside.

In the same way, the real presence operates, in the truest sense of reality, the reality of God.

 

[concretecamper]

None of that addresses the idea of Transubstantiation, however, and that was the focus of discussion, not the Eucharist in general, Real Presence, or mystery.

I am curious if you can scientifically explain Real Presence in an Anglican sense? If you take an Anglican consecrated host through an airport scanner...is the something that shows up underneath or inside the host? Just curious.

Or do you rely on "it's a mystery" explanation also.

 

[Albion]

hmmm google says "(especially in the Roman Catholic Church) the conversion of the substance of the Eucharistic elements into the body and blood of Christ at consecration, only the appearances of bread and wine still remaining."

No, I think what I said does address it. It is the supernatural reality of anything that matters. For example, you may appear as you do according to the pattern of this world, but because you are born again you are more than you appear. You are no longer male or female, greek, jew, barbarian, scythian, slave or free, you are one with the body of Christ Jesus. In the truest sense of reality .. you are born again regardless of how you appear on the outside.

In the same way, the real presence operates, in the truest sense of reality, the reality of God.

I wasn't denying any of what you wrote. It was just that you didn't deal with the uniquely RCC definition of the thing--Transubstantiation. Whether it is acceptable to you or not isn't the issue, either. But this IS the distinctively RC view, and that is what we had been discussing ever since the OP (which you can see also directs its opposition to transubstantiation in particular, even though it doesn't use that word.)

 

[KWCrazy]

It's a METAPHOR! When Christ passed the bread and the wine it wasn't His body and blood either because He was still using it. It is symbolic of taking part of the table of Christ and celebrating His sacrifice with other Christians. It is not for the unsaved. It is to remind us of the sacrifice which the Lord made for us. Claiming it's real blood and flesh only makes people look foolish. It's deeper than that. It's accepting the Lord into your body like any other nourishment you can't live without.