Question for those who belong to churches that believe in closed communion.

[Hentenza]

We don't know and the question is purely academic. I suspect He did in order to lead by example.

He didn't need to take part, but I think He did. He didn't need to be baptised by John either, but He was.

That's just my personal opinion. I don't know for sure either way.

Hi Bob, yes, my “mental exercise” is indeed purely academic. It was designed to provoke thought. I have no ill intentions here.

You hit it on the head when you posed the question of whether Jesus partook of the bread and wine at that time. Both accounts in Matthew and Luke are not specific enough to prove it either way. Any thoughts?

A second question would be, if He did partake in the bread and the wine, would the closed communion churches allow Him to partake in communion?

Small print disclaimer: I know we have a variety of beliefs in these forums ranging from symbolic to transubstantiation hence the mental exercise stipulation in the OP. No need to get anyone’s feathers ruffled.

 

[Bob Crowley]

Hi Bob, yes, my “mental exercise” is indeed purely academic. It was designed to provoke thought. I have no ill intentions here.

You hit it on the head when you posed the question of whether Jesus partook of the bread and wine at that time. Both accounts in Matthew and Luke are not specific enough to prove it either way. Any thoughts?

A second question would be, if He did partake in the bread and the wine, would the closed communion churches allow Him to partake in communion?

Small print disclaimer: I know we have a variety of beliefs in these forums ranging from symbolic to transubstantiation hence the mental exercise stipulation in the OP. No need to get anyone’s feathers ruffled.

Any thoughts?

Not really - HIs concerrn was for us to eat His flesh and drink His blood. I think it was left out so wouldn't waste time conjecturing on the issue.

It's a bit like Paul's "thorn in the flesh" - I think it is deliberately not specified so that it can be applied to any "thorn in the flesh". If he said he'd had a bung knee, the bloke with a hearing loss like myself would have thought "Well, that was his problem. If Christ could heal the deaf man what's stopping Him now?"

As for Christ in "closed communion" churches, that would depend on whether we recognised Him or not.

Would he turn up in a Jewish male's cloak with tassels, sandals and a beard with "Son of God" as a flashing halo above His head, or would he turn up incognito in 20th century western jeans, t-shirt and sneakers and a buzz cut fade haircut, complete with nose ring and pierced nostrils?

If the latter we would rely on him to be honest about his denominational standing and would treat Him like anybody else, since we would not know who He was.

The current Catholic practice is that if a non-Catholic comes forward during communion, they can cross their arms across their chest and they will be given a blessing but not communion. Or they can stay seated.

On the other hand if He suddenly walked up behind the altar, and held out his hands so everybody could see the scars from the nails, we'd probably fall on the floor.

 

[jas3]

It was designed to provoke thought. I have no ill intentions here.

Then you might want to address the multiple times it's been pointed out to you by several people in this thread that your question makes no sense from a historical Christian perspective, because right now it sure looks like you think you've got a clever "gotcha" against traditional Christianity that in reality is on the level of an atheist asking whether God can create a boulder so heavy He can't lift it.

 

[Hentenza]

Then you might want to address the multiple times it's been pointed out to you by several people in this thread that your question makes no sense from a historical Christian perspective, because right now it sure looks like you think you've got a clever "gotcha" against traditional Christianity that in reality is on the level of an atheist asking whether God can create a boulder so heavy He can't lift it.

It doesn’t make sense only from your church’s understanding. You are welcomed not to answer if it makes you uncomfortable. Many other churches do not agree with your understanding.
Secondly it’s a mental exercise. Be creative.

 

[jas3]

It doesn’t make sense only from your church’s understanding.

No, it doesn't make sense from a Christian perspective, period. You're positing a Second Coming before the Second Coming.

Secondly it’s a mental exercise.

So is the question of God creating a boulder too heavy to handle, but in both cases the answer is just that the person asking the question deeply misunderstands what he's talking about.

 

[RamiC]

It doesn’t make sense only from your church’s understanding.

Can you explain the sense that you see in your own belief that Jesus might turn up in human form at your church to consume His own body and His own blood as a means of following a request He made to His friends that they would do so, in order to remember Him after His imminent death?

Please.

 

[Hentenza]

No, it doesn't make sense from a Christian perspective, period. You're positing a Second Coming before the Second Coming.

I’m a Christian. I can do a mental exercise.

So is the question of God creating a boulder too heavy to handle, but in both cases the answer is just that the person asking the question deeply misunderstands what he's talking about.

That is a fallacy. I perfectly understand what my exercise is about. You are under no obligation to participate in this thread if it causes you distress. Nor is it my intention to litigate the various views of communion.

Be blessed

 

[Hentenza]

Can you explain the sense that you see in your own belief that Jesus might turn up in human form at your church to consume His own body and His own blood as a means of following a request He made to His friends that they would do so, in order to remember Him after His imminent death?

Please.

The communion is secondary to my exercise. I’m looking for the invitation. I had another poster (a Catholic) in another thread expressed the thought that if Jesus returned now we would do as we did before and kill Him again. So don’t get too consumed in what your church teaches about communion.

 

[RamiC]

The communion is secondary to my exercise.

From your OP "“If” Jesus came back to dwell among us humans again in the form of a man. Would He be able to have communion in your church?"

If you think He would, in your open communion church, please explain what you believe communion is?

 

[Hentenza]

From your OP "“If” Jesus came back to dwell among us humans again in the form of a man. Would He be able to have communion in your church?"

If you think He would, in your open communion church, please explain what you believe communion is?

Not germane to this discussion. I am not
arguing the different views of communion. Would your church invite Him?

 

[RamiC]

Not germane to this discussion. I am not
arguing the different views of communion. Would your church invite Him?

You are refusing to answer yourself?

Your question still shows you apparently have no comprehension of what all Christians (using CF definition) universally believe communion to be.

 

[jas3]

That is a fallacy. I perfectly understand what my exercise is about.

You've repeatedly refused to explain in what sense you think Jesus might show up in the form of a person off the street asking for His own Body and Blood in Communion, so it's not clear that you do have a coherent understanding of your exercise. All you seem to want is to hear "no" from traditional Christians as if that would prove a point.

 

[Hentenza]

You are refusing to answer yourself?

Your question still shows you apparently have no comprehension of what all Christians (using CF definition) universally believe communion to be.

I answered the question. It’s my OP. If you don’t like it or it causes you stress then you don’t have to post here but questioning my level of knowledge it’s not a nice thing to do.

BTW- your church’s belief in communion is not universal among the body of Christ.

 

[Hentenza]

You've repeatedly refused to explain in what sense you think Jesus might show up in the form of a person off the street asking for His own Body and Blood in Communion, so it's not clear that you do have a coherent understanding of your exercise. All you seem to want is to hear "no" from traditional Christians as if that would prove a point.

In my mind exercise Jesus shows up as a man with ordinary looks.

 

[RamiC]

I answered the question. It’s my OP.

Every word in your OP is right here -

Mental exercise.

“If” Jesus came back to dwell among us humans again in the form of a man. Would He be able to have communion in your church?

There is no answer there. Please post the answer....

BTW- your church’s belief in communion is not universal among the body of Christ.

I did not refer to my church, I said "all Christians (using CF definition) universally believe communion to be." You did realise that there are things all Christians (using CF definition) do believe didn't you? Here is the link again, so you can see - CF Statement of Faith .

 

[Hentenza]

Every word in your OP is right here -

Mental exercise.

“If” Jesus came back to dwell among us humans again in the form of a man. Would He be able to have communion in your church?

There is no answer there. Please post the answer....

What part of “in the form of a man” don’t you understand? I have no clue what you are asking.

I did not refer to my church, I said "all Christians (using CF definition) universally believe communion to be." You did realise that there are things all Christians (using CF definition) do believe didn't you? Here is the link again, so you can see - CF Statement of Faith .

lol I have been a member here since 2007 and was part of the advisory team that designed CF’s statement of faith. I think I’m well qualified to know what it says.

There are churches that believe in transubstantiation, others that believe in real presence, and others that believe it to be symbolic. All of them are Christian churches so which one are you talking about. CF’s statement of faith does not favor any one belief.

 

[RamiC]

What part of “in the form of a man” don’t you understand? I have no clue what you are asking.

Ok, here is my question...“If” Jesus came back to dwell among us humans again in the form of a man. Would He be able to have communion in your church?

So what is your answer?

 

[RamiC]

There are churches that believe in transubstantiation, others that believe in real presence, and others that believe it to be symbolic. All of them are Christian churches so which one are you talking about. CF’s statement of faith does not favor any one belief.

The differences that you are referring to there are irrelevant to your OP...we all believe that we are participating in communion because "26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the[c] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.” Matthew 26 - 29 ESV . That is universal.

 

[Hentenza]

Ok, here is my question...“If” Jesus came back to dwell among us humans again in the form of a man. Would He be able to have communion in your church?

So what is your answer?

If He wanted to. In the NT Jesus tested His disciples and the Pharisees so it follows that He would also test his body of believers here. Like I said before my interest from the OP is in the invitation. In my opinion, and without insulting anyone, I think today’s churches have gotten quite legalistic rather than welcoming.

 

[Hentenza]

The differences that you are referring to there are irrelevant to your OP...we all believe that we are participating in communion because "26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the[c] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.” Matthew 26 - 29 ESV . That is universal.

Ok so how exactly would that hinder my mental exercise?