What Early Christians believed about the Eucharist

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
cyril-vs-zwingli01.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Tra Phull

Ecumenical Loose Canon
Oct 24, 2019
1,248
684
Waco
✟45,894.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Methodists believe in a Real Presence, but hold it as a Mystery, not holding to either Transubstantiaton or the idea that Eucharist is "just a symbol."

"My blood is REAL drink, and my flesh is REAL food"

As the video points out - the idea of "just symbolic" is very late.

Sometimes I wonder where is Christ's blood and body AT TIMES OTHER THAN EUCHARIST?

We generally say that Christ's glorified body now is FLESH AND BONE, but not FLESH AND BLOOD, due to a scripture that says "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom"

His body is "at the right hand of God", we affirm this, but don't really believe that God the Father literally has a RIGHT HAND.

And where is the spilled blood of Christ right now?

Wherever it is, in this Mystery of Eucharist, it comes from wherever it is to be united with part of the body that sits at the right hand of the Father.

Joins into a Real Presence, but the HOW OF IT remains a mystery. We accept it, like we accept a mysterious TRINITY but sometimes it defies explanation.

Real Presence - Real Mystery.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,159
16,006
Flyoverland
✟1,223,623.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Methodists believe in a Real Presence, but hold it as a Mystery, not holding to either Transubstantiaton or the idea that Eucharist is "just a symbol."
Those are not opposite poles, symbolism and transubstantiation. Transubstantiation is merely an explanation of a reality, the reality that Jesus is indeed God with us. And it does work in an Aristotelian philosophic framework. When Protestants lost their cognition into Aristotle it was not a surprise they couldn't comprehend transubstantiation any longer.
As the video points out - the idea of "just symbolic" is very late.
Then I'd think you would be obligated to follow the early practice of the faith.
We generally say that Christ's glorified body now is FLESH AND BONE, but not FLESH AND BLOOD, due to a scripture that says "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom"
Is that really a Methodist 'thing'? I've never heard of it before, a resurrected Jesus but without blood. That;s different.
Joins into a Real Presence, but the HOW OF IT remains a mystery. We accept it....
How would you compare and contrast your belief and that of the Orthodox, who also claim to believe in the Real Presence?
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,159
16,006
Flyoverland
✟1,223,623.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
It's not a Methodist thing, Chef

It comes from some Bible verse about flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom
So the resurrected Jesus has no blood? Just flesh and bones, but no blood? Just because somebody thinks they got some Bible verse backing them up on that? I'm not getting it.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,159
16,006
Flyoverland
✟1,223,623.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
1 Cor 15:50
50 I tell you this, brethren: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.

How do you go from that to Jesus having no blood? You could just as well have made the argument that Jesus had no flesh after His resurrection. It's just as odd.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tra Phull

Ecumenical Loose Canon
Oct 24, 2019
1,248
684
Waco
✟45,894.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
1 Cor 15:50 has led some to conclude that the resurrected body is flesh and bone but not flesh and blood, I didn't make it up

I don't know if it's true, or if Oreo cookies and Pepsi can be used as elements of the Eucharist

If they are going to be transformed into body and blood of Christ, what difference does it make what they started out as?
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,159
16,006
Flyoverland
✟1,223,623.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
I don't know, Chevy

I have no systematic theology on Christ's resurrected body
I'm just saying it's really odd for anyone to think that 1 Cor 15:50 means that the resurrected Jesus has no blood but just an exsanguinated body and bone which has non-functional marrow. Especially when there is an alternate explanation that makes much more sense. And is contextually coherent.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,159
16,006
Flyoverland
✟1,223,623.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
1 Cor 15:50 has led some to conclude that the resurrected body is flesh and bone but not flesh and blood, I didn't make it up

I don't know if it's true,
So where did you pick it up from? It's just strange.
... or if Oreo cookies and Pepsi can be used as elements of the Eucharist.
They can't. Real bread and real wine. Period.
If they are going to be transformed into body and blood of Christ, what difference does it make what they started out as?
Jesus took bread and wine ....
 
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
or if Oreo cookies and Pepsi can be used as elements of the Eucharist
Spoiler Alert: They can't.

If they are going to be transformed into body and blood of Christ, what difference does it make what they started out as?
With respect, this is one thing about Protestantism that eventually drove me away from Protestantism.

With Protestantism, there's never any room for texture or distinction. Something is either 100% one thing or 100% something else. There's no middle ground, no shade of gray, no nuance. Not with Protestantism. The idea of saying "Both and" seems foreign to many Protestants. And that's one reason why I think Protestants usually make such lamentably poor theologians.

The consecrated elements are Our Lord's body and blood. As Catholics, we believe that.

However, the fact that we believe that doesn't mean that we suddenly forget about the commemorative aspect that Our Lord Himself commanded during the Last Supper. He called the elements His Body and His Blood. And then He said to do this in His memory.

So the Church obediently regards those things as His Body and His Blood while we also do this in His memory. It's not 100% of one thing exclusively or 100% of the other thing exclusively. It's both and.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,159
16,006
Flyoverland
✟1,223,623.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Forget it.
Unwatching thread.
Well, if you can find a contemporary source for this idea that Jesus has flesh and bone but not flesh and blood I would appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0