• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.

Featured 1 Cor 11 "this is my body" in communion vs Literal historic accounts

Discussion in 'General Theology' started by BobRyan, Aug 4, 2020.

  1. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +4,253
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    Since this topic keeps popping up on the Genesis thread -- I vote that it gets its own focus and space.

    1. Everyone might agree that just because one text uses a symbol - does not mean all texts are symbolic.

    2. There are allegories - like the one in Judges where "the trees go out to elect a king" - and nobody is all that challenged when reading that text. Judges 9:8

    3. 1 Cor 11 "do this in remembrance of Me" makes it a memorial does it not?

    1 Cor 11
    23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.

    Jer 31:31-33 "THIS is the New Covenant"

    Hebrews 8:6-12 "THIS is the New Covenant"

    John 10: 7 So Jesus said to them again, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep

    John 15: 5 "I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +4,253
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    If each time a text that is a historic account is brought up - we are instantly referred to 1 Cor 11 symbolism - is that happening because if you accept any historic account you must therefore be rejecting all symbolic references in scripture?

    What exactly is the logic for making that connection between the communion service and some historic account of events that happened in nature? The service did happen in real life - but what about the terms used in it? Are they symbols?

    I notice that 1 Cor 11 does not say anyone at that table tries to bite someone sitting at the table.

    And no one in John 6 tries to bite someone either.
     
  3. Andrewn

    Andrewn Well-Known Member CF Ambassadors Supporter

    +1,318
    Canada
    Anglican
    Married
    There have been wars bec of this and people burned to death. And Christians who do not have communion with others and divisions and quarrels and all sorts of ugliness.

    If I'm wrong, plz remove my post.
     
  4. eleos1954

    eleos1954 God is Love Supporter

    +3,496
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    US-Others

    It is clearly symbolic ...

    John 6:35

    35 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.

    Notice the meaning Jesus gave to the Passover wine:

    “Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you. For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom’ ” (Matthew 26:27-29).
     
  5. Gary K

    Gary K Active Member

    455
    +115
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    US-Constitution
    I think the context of what is going on in 1Corinthians 11 is the most important part of what Paul has to say. Context is always king and no less so than in this passage of scripture.

    It looks to me like church members were getting together and bringing their own meals as a show of ostentation so that the rich were feasting while the poor were suffering hunger for lack of enough food. This is hardly an example of what celebrating the last supper is supposed to be about. We're supposed to celebrating the love of God and His goodness towards us and serving one another, not making an obnoxious show of our own wealth. That's why Paul says they are partaking of the last supper unworthily. Their motives were entirely selfish from what Paul says. It was not a season of humbly serving each other, but a season of lording it over their poor brethren and getting drunk while doing so.

    That is the antithesis of expressing the love of God.
     
  6. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +26,438
    Anglican
    Married
    That's right.
    That's so.
    Yes.

    So you can see that there is agreement from a traditionalist like myself to 1, 2, and 3. All of them. But here's the rub...

    ...as concerns the point in 1 and 2 (allegories or symbols), we've already agreed that they do get used in Scripture.

    However, that doesn't mean that everything in Scripture is symbolic or an analogy and I would hope that you and I would be in agreement on that, too.

    So that leaves the point you spent the most time with--that the sacrament is a memorial or remembrance.

    However, this also doesn't change anything. All the churches that believe in the Real Presence, such as the Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, and Orthodox Eastern churches, believe and assert that in addition to everything else they believe about the sacred meal it is also a memorial or remembrance. And there is nothing in their theologies that would make this at all peculiar or questionable.
     
  7. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +4,253
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    Well in the dark ages Christians were being killed for all sorts of things including not praying to Mary or having a Bible in their own language that they could read. But that does not mean we should avoid reading our Bibles :)
     
  8. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +4,253
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    yep

    Well on the one hand I am glad to hear that - but on the other hand I have read some things about "one and the same sacrifice" claiming that Christ's death on the cross and also the power of the priest "to confect the body blood sould and divinity" of Christ in the mass - results not in a memorial of a sacrifice 2000 years ago -- but rather participation in that sacrifice with the actual flesh of the Son of God (and soul and divinity) confected by a priest who has the power to do it.

    anyone can hold a memorial to anything they want -- they don't need "power" to "confect the body, blood ,soul and divinity" of God to have a memorial.
     
  9. ViaCrucis

    ViaCrucis Evangelical Catholic of the Augsburg Confession

    +18,777
    United States
    Lutheran
    In Relationship
    US-Others
    Not a memorial, anamnesis.

    "And when He had given thanks, He broke it, and said, 'Take, eat, this is My body, which is broken for you, do this for the remembrance of Me.' Likewise also, He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, 'This cup is the New Covenant in My blood, do this, as often as you drink it, for the remembrance of Me.'"

    πίνητε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν

    "do this for the rememberance of Me"

    "for the remembrance"

    eis ten ... anamnesin

    Anamnesis is not a memorial. It is a term directly connected with the Jewish Passover. In the Haggadah which is read every Passover in Jewish homes around the world, here is what it says,

    When the matzot (bread) is broken, this is what is said:

    "This is the bread of affliction that our fathers ate in the land of Egypt. Whoever is hungry, let him come and eat; whoever is in need, let him come and conduct the Seder of Passover. This year we are here; next year in the land of Israel. This year we are slaves; next year we will be free people."

    Continuing on,

    "We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt, and the L-rd, our G-d, took us out from there with a strong hand and with an outstretched arm."

    Take note that every Passover, every generation of the Jews do not merely say, "our fathers were slaves" or "our ancestors were slaves", but rather "we were slaves" and "this year we are slaves, next year we will be free"

    The Passover connects the present with the past; through the Passover every generation of Jews is a participant in the Exodus, every Jew is present in the captivity, every Jew is present in the redemption to freedom.

    Jesus says, "This is My body, which is broken for you, do this for the remembrance of Me."

    Not as a memorial, not as some fond idea of something that happened long ago. No, this is the body of Christ which was broken, and here in our eating of it is Christ whose flesh was broken and pierced for our transgressions, here we share and participate in Christ's own broken flesh, His atoning work on the cross. That is why the Apostle, earlier, says, "Is not the bread which we break participation in the body of Christ?"

    And the same with the wine, Chris takes the cup, saying, "This is the cup of the New Covenant in My blood, do this, as often as you drink of it, for the remembrance of Me"

    What is the cup of wine? It is the blood of Christ which was shed for us, it is not a token memorial, but the true blood of Christ which poured out from His veins and was spilled upon the ground. This is the blood of the true Passover Lamb, and here with this cup we partake and participate in Christ's own work. For, again, the Apostle had written, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not participation in the blood of Christ?"

    So that here, with this bread and wine, there is a participation in the body and blood of Christ, here is Christ's body and blood, here is Christ for you and me.

    No, Christ is not being sacrificed again. No, but in the same way that the Jews at every Passover can say "We were slaves in Egypt" we say through this Holy Eucharist that this is the broken flesh of Christ and the shed blood of Christ, this is Christ who bore our sins, who was crucified, who gave Himself up, and here in these simple gifts and elements of bread and wine is His true body and true blood, which is for the forgiveness of our sins, and we are participants in here. We are, through the Eucharist, present with Christ at His death, even as He is present here in, with, and under these simple gifts of bread and wine, which is for us.

    "Consider the people of Israel: Are not those who eat the sacrifices fellow partakers in the altar?" - 1 Corinthians 10:18

    Anamnesis. Not memorial.

    -CryptoLutheran
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  10. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +4,253
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    1."the remembering of things from a supposed previous existence"
    2."a patient's account of a medical history."??

    ok well - I think "in remembrance of Me" works best as "memorial" since we do that all the time.

    "for the remembrance"

    But still aren't you happy that translators don't use that term?

    Instead we have - do this in remembrance of Me.”

    Having said that - I agree that this service was put in as the new Passover that begins at that moment.
    Passover was a "remembrance" of deliverance from Egypt.
    The Communion service is the remembrance of deliverance from slavery to sin.
     
  11. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +26,438
    Anglican
    Married
    A couple of things about your reply there:

    1. You are referring to a (Roman) Catholic belief only. None of the other churches that believe in the Real Presence agree.

    2. And in recent years, the RCC has backtracked on the "re-sacrifice" idea while, of course, denying that she has changed anything.

    3. Even if we were to continue examining that view, there still isn't anything in it that eliminates or negates the memorial/remembrance aspect from the sacrament. The bread and wine are consecrated prior to distribution with the priest reciting those very words you quoted about a remembrance.

    You betcha, but the point here was about the sacrament of Holy Communion being a memorial...or not. It is one such, but if correctly understood it is that and more as well.
     
  12. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +4,253
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    True - I was talking about the "Memorial" in reference to that "continuation" of the sacrifice in some way.

    So I am curious if the "confect the body, blood, soul, and divinity" claim changed in that regard since I think it is considered an infallible position taken by ecumenical council. I could be mistaken.

    Admittedly the text itself speaking of memorial "remembrance" is quoted - but the argument for transubstantiation where "real body,blood,soul, divinity" seems to be a sticking point. In fact they claim that even a priest that has been excommunicated "retains the powers" to confect the real person of Christ "soul and divinity" body and blood.

    The reason this thread comes up is that on the other thread about the book of Genesis - we had some people wanting to connect it to 1 Cor 11 and to the point of the real body and blood vs symbolic reference or memorial.

    In a memorials the real body is not needed for each or any memorial - correct?

    The real presence is always needed but is it there because "The body,blood,soul and divinity" of Christ has been confected by one who has the power to do that? or is it because "Christ in you the hope of glory" , "Where two or three are gathered together there I am..." ... is it a reference to the living resurrected Christ - or to the slain body,blood,soul,divinity sacrifice?
     
  13. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +26,438
    Anglican
    Married
    The Catholic Church used to teach that the priest sacrificed Jesus anew during the Mass and that this is why the Mass was effective in petitioning God for forgiveness from sin and for the various needs and wants of the participants.

    It now insists that the Mass isn't a re-sacrificing of Jesus but, rather, that His sacrifice on the Cross is timeless, so that the "Sacrifice of the Mass" is part of the one sacrifice made by Jesus for the sins of the world., etc.

    In the sense that you don't believe in this specifically Roman Catholic belief that is in addition to its belief in the Mass as a memorial? If so, the sticking point isn't the concept of a memorial (or not).

    I know. But it's a mistake. This issue is not an "either-or" controversy. Both Catholics and Protestants acknowledge and affirm the memorial aspect.

    No. The doctrine of the Real Presence holds that Christ is truly present in the elements (br and w). Transubstantiation is a variance of that and holds that the process amounts to the complete change-over and, consequently, an elimination of the bread and wine.

    Well, for Holy Communion to be valid, it must be administered by a validly ordained and installed recipient of Holy Orders, i.e. ordination. It's not the case that just anyone in a Bible Study group, for example, can reach for a bottle and a loaf of bread and host a Communion service.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  14. concretecamper

    concretecamper Member of His Church

    +1,561
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Republican
    utterly false.
    true
     
  15. concretecamper

    concretecamper Member of His Church

    +1,561
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Republican
    false

    I wish people would stick to making statements about their own faith.
     
  16. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +4,253
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    I have seen that last point a few times. So then extending the sacrifice to continue , rather than repeating the sacrifice to have ended but that can be repeated by the power that they have. The one ongoing sacrifice , extended sacrifice that comes about via priests that have the power to make that happen.

    Which is why I think you don't see them arguing for "memorial" very much since the thing has not ceased to be memorialized - it is ongoing via their ability to confect its continuing form
     
  17. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +4,253
    United States
    SDA
    Married
    Do you have any "memorial" statements from Catholic sources regarding the sacrifice of the mass?
     
  18. concretecamper

    concretecamper Member of His Church

    +1,561
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Republican
    From Trent

    The Mass Is The Same Sacrifice As That Of The Cross

    We therefore confess that the Sacrifice of the Mass is and ought to be considered one and the same Sacrifice as that of the cross, for the victim is one and the same, namely, Christ our Lord, who offered Himself, once only, a bloody Sacrifice on the altar of the cross. The bloody and unbloody victim are not two, but one victim only, whose Sacrifice is daily renewed in the Eucharist, in obedience to the command of our Lord: Do this for a commemoration of me.

    The priest is also one and the same, Christ the Lord; for the ministers who offer Sacrifice, consecrate the holy mysteries, not in their own person, but in that of Christ, as the words of consecration itself show, for the priest does not say: This is the body of Christ, but, This is my body; and thus, acting in the Person of Christ the Lord, he changes the substance of the bread and wine into the true substance of His body and blood.

    The Mass A Sacrifice Of Praise, Thanksgiving And Propitiation

    This being the case, it must be taught without any hesitation that, as the holy Council (of Trent) has also) explained, the sacred and holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not a Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving only, or a mere commemoration of the Sacrifice performed on the cross, but also truly a propitiatory Sacrifice, by which God is appeased and rendered propitious to us. If, therefore, with a pure heart, a lively faith, and affected with an inward sorrow for our transgressions, we immolate and offer this most holy victim, we shall, without doubt, obtain mercy from the Lord, and grace in time of need; for SO delighted is the Lord with the door of this victim that, bestowing on us the gift of grace and repentance, He pardons our sins. Hence this usual prayer of the Church: As often as the commemoration of this victim is celebrated, so often is the work of our salvation being done; that is to say, through this unbloody Sacrifice flow to us the most plenteous fruits of that bloody victim.
     
  19. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +26,438
    Anglican
    Married
    Good.

    I still disagree on this one. The "memorial" part is right there in the consecration prayer, I believe. I'd have to check the wording in the New Mass, however, in order to be sure. But in the Anglican Prayerbook, it's right there, quoted, along with the rest of the wording about "This is my body," etc.

    In short, I strongly feel that any contention that the service omits or even downplays the memorial aspect in a Communion service as conducted by a priest or minister of a church that believes in Real Presence is quite wrong.
     
  20. BobRyan

    BobRyan Junior Member

    +4,253
    United States
    SDA
    Married
     
Loading...