Does communion have a role in salvation?

[Albion]

Yes... although if one delves into the historical theology, one will describe a variety of ways that the substance of the rite is described in the pre-medieval church. None fit with memorialism.

Quite right. That's why I wrote what I did. Real Presence can be defended as the Apostolic teaching, but not most of the particular adaptations of it that are identified with certain denominations.

 

[Hawkiz]

Is that how you use metaphors? You announce it that way?

Also, you have to take the whole lot of the "I am" sayings and treat them the same way:

"I am the door. . .but not metaphorically"

"I am the light. . . but not metaphorically"

Jesus, as much as I disagree with Him here, assumes that people have enough sense to understand that He is not calling for the eating of human flesh and the drinking of human blood.

Scripture answers your 'questions', and you yourself claim to disagree with Christ.
What did the rest of the John 6 passage have to say about this supposed metaphor (only)? The disciples in verse 60 struggled with what Jesus said in the same way that you are: they grumbled and complained. Why if He was speaking only in metaphor? Answer: because they correctly understood that He was not speaking only metaphorically. Jesus Himself confirms this in verse 61...Jesus knew exactly what those followers were thinking and exactly how they were understanding His words. He did not correct them as He did when His words were not understood.

As for your 'I am the door' and 'I am the light' comments, we do not see the confusion and grumbling over these statements from Jesus that we see in John 6; so it can be easily reasoned that it was in fact clearly understood by the disciples that He WAS speaking in metaphor at these times. John 6 makes it clear that Jesus' words were NOT taken as only metaphor when He spoke them to the disciples, unless you allow that Jesus lets people walk away from Him, thus not following Him, in confusion? No. Scripture again answers this for us, in the same passage: Jesus knew full well that some would reject Him based on some of what He taught, saying that some wouldn't believe even if they physically saw Him ascend to Heaven. Jesus Himself further questions the twelve, to test their understanding of what He has said. To say that this is 'only' a metaphor is to fail to see that Jesus made it clear that it was much more. In the 'door' and 'light' passages, no one questions what Jesus said, presumably because they all properly understood what He meant.

I urge you to continue to examine this and other passages, and not dismiss what we can not understand.

Peace in Christ

 

[Albion]

Scripture answers your 'questions', and you yourself claim to disagree with Christ.
What did the rest of the John 6 passage have to say about this supposed metaphor (only)? The disciples in verse 60 struggled with what Jesus said in the same way that you are: they grumbled and complained. Why if He was speaking only in metaphor?

Answer: because metaphors are easily misunderstood.

Answer: because they correctly understood that He was not speaking only metaphorically. Jesus Himself confirms this in verse 61...Jesus knew exactly what those followers were thinking and exactly how they were understanding His words. He did not correct them as He did when His words were not understood.

That's true, but neither does it mean that he was referring to the Lord's Supper which had not been instituted yet. If he was intent upon them understanding the meaning of something that didn't exist and which would seem abhorrent to them at that point in time anyway, he would have made certain to do so.

John 6 makes it clear that Jesus' words were NOT taken as only metaphor when He spoke them to the disciples, unless you allow that Jesus lets people walk away from Him, thus not following Him, in confusion?

Well, he'd done that before...as with the exchange he had with Nicodemus.

 

[Hawkiz]

Answer: because metaphors are easily misunderstood.


That's true, but neither does it mean that he was referring to the Lord's Supper which had not been instituted yet. If he was intent upon them understanding the meaning of something that didn't exist and which would seem abhorrent to them at that point in time anyway, he would have made certain to do so.


Well, he'd done that before...as with the exchange he had with Nicodemus.

I'm not sure that metaphors are easily misunderstood. This appears to be a rare time where that is possible, because the Scriptures go into such great description to point out that His words were not initially understood. Jesus' words of explanation after He is questioned about what He meant indicate a strengthening of a literal interpretation, not a more symbolic one.

Good to cross paths with you again brother. I very much appreciate and respect your thoughtful insights. You challenge me to review my faith in thoughtful and prayerful manners. Thank you

Peace in Christ

Hawkiz

 

[Albion]

I'm not sure that metaphors are easily misunderstood. This appears to be a rare time where that is possible, because the Scriptures go into such great description to point out that His words were not initially understood. Jesus' words of explanation after He is questioned about what He meant indicate a strengthening of a literal interpretation, not a more symbolic one.

His explanation seems to me to strengthen the idea of it referring to Himself in a fundamental way, not to his literal flesh and blood specifically.

Good to cross paths with you again brother. I very much appreciate and respect your thoughtful insights. You challenge me to review my faith in thoughtful and prayerful manners. Thank you

Peace in Christ

You're very kind. I'm always glad to read your messages, too.

 

[FireDragon76]

Again and again (and again), why do you stop interpreting scripture this way at this one instance? Why not Jesus as a gate???

If you take your own theology seriously, Jesus is a gate, he's just not a wooden gate with hinges. There's no rule saying gates have to be made out of wood, or even physical objects with hinges.

Saying that the substance of the Lord's Supper is merely bread and wine because it tastes like bread and wine, seems like a dangerous path to go down, because it basically says what can be observed with the conventional five senses is the only possible reality. That doesn't sound compatible with Christian theism. In addition, there are numerous instances in life where the characteristics of a thing to do not necessarily have anything to do with what it is- they are accidental to what it really is. Like apples- most are red, but if you have a green apple, it doesn't cease to be an apple . So the characteristic of being red is accidental to being an apple. Even the flavor of an apple is accidental to it. If they came out with a genetically engineered apple that tasted exactly like Chicago-style pizza, it wouldn't cease to be an apple because of it.

 

[AJTruth]

The Cup of Blessing (1 Cor 11:25): A cup of wine, a symbolic representation of the sacrificial New Covenant, cut by & in the Lords Blood. For the forgivness & removal of every Sin every believer ever commits.

The bread that the Lord took & broke (1 Cor 11:24) a symbolic representation of The Lords Sinless body, BROKEN, for the spiritual & physical restitution of every believer.

Pay special attention to Matt 8:17; it accentuate's why His Body was Broken

Matthew 8:
16 When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word """and healed all the sick"""

17 This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: “He took up our infirmities """& bore our diseases"""

Isa 53 4-6, 1 Pet 2:24 & Matt 6:49-59 All accentuate Christs Body was Broken for our spiritual & physical health.

John 6:
53 """Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man & drink his blood
""""ye have no life in you"""

54 "Whoso eateth my flesh & drinketh my blood, hath eternal life" & I will raise him up at the last day

55 For """my flesh is meat indeed & my blood is drink indeed"""

56 """"He that eateth my flesh & drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me & I in him"""

57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: """so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me"""

1 Cor 10: 18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices (The Priests) partakers of the altar? (Lev 7:6 & 7:15)

Lev 24:5 In the Temple the showbread was baked & eaten (By the Priests) weekly.

Acts: 20:7 Upon the 1st day of the week, when the disciples came together to "break bread"

REMEMBER - REMEMBERANCE
Generally when we go to REMEMBER the death of a fallen soldier, a family member or loved one. It is a time when we feel grief & loss.

REMEMBER: JESUS HAS RISEN! Our REMEMBERANCE in the Lords Supper. Is a time for CELEBRATION! We are envoking the NEW COVENANT.

"""Remembrance""" itself is a covenantal word. In the Lord's Supper we "Remember" that our blessings were purchased through a costly price

1 Cor 11:26 This ordinance is to be repeated """as often as you do it""" until Christ returns. Each time we proclaim His death in the Supper, we are also reminded that He is returning.

In the Lord's Supper we """Remember""" the past.

The covenant that brings us the forgiveness of sins was ratified, or "cut," by the shedding of Jesus blood & His broken body.

When we look forward to the future: you do show the Lord's death until he comes

The sacraments themselves do not save us.

We are saved by grace through faith in Jesus sacrificial redemptive work.

The Lord's Supper, "nourishes & sustains" those already born again, "His Church/Body".

Proverbs 4:20 My son, attend to my words; incline thine ear unto my sayings.

22 For they are life unto those that find them, """and health to all their flesh"""

Psalms 105:37 They ate the LAMB & the next day: Although many were old ""NOT 1 WAS FEEBLE AMOUNG THEM""

Question: Are you a believer? Are you sickly or feeling ill? Have you been partaking in Communion REGULARLY?

Question 2: If you had were hungry & close starvation, would 1 meal completely restore your health?

The longer its been since you last partook in the Lords Supper or the sicker you are right now. The more often you should enter into Communion with the Lord!

Put the bread into your hand; close your eyes; see the Lord on the Cross; eat the bread (his body) now praise & thank Him for your spiritual & physical healing!

P.S. Rereading John 6:53 Then """Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood""";

"""""ye have NO LIFE in you""""""

Without spiritual life you. You will never be able to reproduce (soul winning) Maranatha

 

[Albion]

The Cup of Blessing (1 Cor 11:25): A cup of wine, a symbolic representation of the sacrificial New Covenant, cut by & in the Lords Blood. For the forgivness & removal of every Sin every believer ever commits.

The bread that the Lord took & broke (1 Cor 11:24) a symbolic representation of The Lords Sinless body, BROKEN, for the spiritual & physical restitution of every believer.

Pay special attention to Matt 8:17; it accentuate's why His Body was Broken

Matthew 8:
16 When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word """and healed all the sick"""

17 This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: “He took up our infirmities """& bore our diseases"""

Isa 53 4-6, 1 Pet 2:24 & Matt 6:49-59 All accentuate Christs Body was Broken for our spiritual & physical health.

John 6:
53 """Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man & drink his blood
""""ye have no life in you"""

54 "Whoso eateth my flesh & drinketh my blood, hath eternal life" & I will raise him up at the last day

55 For """my flesh is meat indeed & my blood is drink indeed"""

56 """"He that eateth my flesh & drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me & I in him"""

57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: """so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me"""

Interestingly enough, though, none of those verses describes the sacrament as a mere symbol--although you did.

 

[AJTruth]

Interestingly enough, though, none of those verses describes the sacrament as a mere symbol--although you did.

The question asked in the OP was:

Does communion have a role in salvation?

I answered that in the post.

2ndly, I've never met anyone with a piece of Christ's body or an actual drop of his blood.

The first scripture I posted:

1Corinthians 11:
25 After 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.

26 For as often as ye eat this """bread""", and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

(THE SCRIPTURES SAY'S: """BREAD"""

The Lord gave them BREAD!!!

So, again I'll go with symbolic representation.

I'm always ready to learn. Would you be kind enough to share the scripture that say's literal. And just how one would go about doing that? Thanks in advance. AJ

 

[Albion]

The question asked in the OP was:

The first scripture I posted:

1Corinthians 11:
25 After 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.

26 For as often as ye eat this """bread""", and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

(THE SCRIPTURES SAY'S: """BREAD"""

The Lord gave them BREAD!!!

So, again I'll go with symbolic representation.

Christ also says in the same breath, "This is my body." Luke 22:19

I didn't need to point that out in my earlier post, although people who insist that the sacrament is only symbolic always mention the part you did and take pains to omit this part. That was because none of the other verses you chose to cite in your post upheld the idea of it being symbolic only.

 

[FireDragon76]

2ndly, I've never met anyone with a piece of Christ's body or an actual drop of his blood.

So you believe in only things you can discern with your senses? How exactly is that a Christian attitude?

I'm always ready to learn. Would you be kind enough to share the scripture that say's literal. And just how one would go about doing that? Thanks in advance. AJ

I expect words not to have meaning when they come from a politician's mouth ( Bill Clinton's "It depends on what the meaning of "is" is"), but we are talking about Jesus Christ here, what part of "This is my body" don't you get?

 

[AJTruth]

Christ also says in the same breath, "This is my body." Luke 22:19

I didn't need to point that out in my earlier post, although people who insist that the sacrament is only symbolic always mention the part you did and take pains to omit this part. That was because none of the other verses you chose to cite in your post upheld the idea of it being symbolic only.

So, you can't provide any scripture that supports your position. Got it thanks.

 

[Albion]

So, you can't provide any scripture that supports your position. Got it thanks.

Both FireDragon and I just cited one for you!

 

[FireDragon76]

So, you can't provide any scripture that supports your position. Got it thanks.

It's arbitrary to insist that words are not literal when there is no context to indicate they would be otherwise. Jesus is quite capable of making bread be his body.

We also do not believe that we receive parts of Christ's body and blood in the sacrament. We receive the whole Christ.

 

[AJTruth]

The bread is symbolic of his body.

He took BREAD and said the BREAD is my body. IT WAS BREAD! Geezzz

 

[Albion]

The bread is symbolic of his body.

He took BREAD and said the BREAD is my body. IT WAS BREAD! Geezzz

So...what are we to do with Jesus saying it was his body?

 

[FireDragon76]

The bread is symbolic of his body.

He took BREAD and said the BREAD is my body. IT WAS BREAD! Geezzz

We don't deny it was bread. But we do deny that it is not also his body.

It t is more than possible for something to be two things at once. Like a painting for instance. It's cloth, doping, and paint. But it also can be an outdoors scene, or a portrait. That's just a rough analogy, of course, but maybe it can give you a clue how something could be two things at once.

 

[FireDragon76]

Personally, I think that makes too much into mere symbolism. And in order to have a remembrance, none of this kind of talk would have been needed. So, I think it has to mean more, although I'm willing to hear different opinions on that matter.

Yeah, if Jesus just wanted a mere recollection of what he had done, he would not have used bread and wine. He could have told the disciples to retell his story.

The sacrament is about something more than just remembrance. It's about Jesus being with us in a physically mediated way through the bread and wine.

 

[Albion]

Yeah, if Jesus just wanted a mere recollection of what he had done, he would not have used bread and wine. He could have told the disciples to retell his story.

The sacrament is about something more than just remembrance. It's about Jesus being with us in a physically mediated way through the bread and wine.

We're in agreement on the truth of the Real Presence. I hate to have the particular definition of that become part of the discussion here.

 

[Soyeong]

John 6:52-59
52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’ 53So Jesus said to them, ‘Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day; 55for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. 56Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them. 57Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live for ever.’ 59He said these things while he was teaching in the synagogue at Capernaum.

I just read this passage and I realized I'd never thought of communion as a way to salvation. Does this passage support that view, and what are your thoughts on communion as a part of our salvation?

In Hebrews 11, it is full of examples of people who lived by faith through living in obedience to God's commands. It is important to understand that we are saved by faith, not by our obedience, but the same faith requires us to live in obedience to God's commands (Ephesians 2:8-10). So whenever the Bible speaks about any sort of action having a role in our salvation, such as communion or baptism, we should understand it as saying that we are saved by the faith that leads us to participate in those tings. If we are not acting in faith and drawing close to God when we have communion, then we are missing the whole point are just eating bread and drinking wine/grape juice.