Holy Communion, Real Presence or merely symbolic?

[Tomb523]

I find your assertion that we are sacerdotalists offensive. Luther, in his preaching and teaching, struggled most of his adult life against the idea that human beings have power in matters of salvation. Nevertheless, he did believe that the Lord's words were not lies or dissimulations. It is by the power and authority of the Word that we declare "This is my body" and "this is my blood".

Declaring words as symbolic do not make them a lie. The extensive use of parables by Jesus was explained in Matthew:

"Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive; For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.’ But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it" (Matthew 13:10-17).

Not everything is literal.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

"Abhors"......

What men think well of and hold in high esteem, Yahweh calls abhorrent.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

A Christian that abhors the blood of Christ is difficult to take seriously.

We overcome "by the word of our testimony and by the blood of the lamb" .... very serious.

Breaking , abhorring, or disrespecting TORAH, potentially deadly serious consequences.

 

[ubicaritas]

Declaring words as symbolic do not make them a lie. The extensive use of parables by Jesus was explained in Matthew:

"Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive; For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.’ But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it" (Matthew 13:10-17).

Not everything is literal.

You overlooked when I said "dissimulation".

The Lutheran approach is to take the plain, literal meaning of Scriptures seriously unless there is good reason to assume otherwise. Jesus is God and able to turn stones into children, why should we doubt that the bread is in fact his true body and the wine his true blood?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

You overlooked when I said "dissimulation".

The Lutheran approach is to take the plain, literal meaning seriously unless there is a reason to think otherwise. Jesus is God and able to turn stones into children, why should we doubt that the bread is in fact his true body and the wine his true blood?

Jesus said in plain, literal words,
MY WORDS ARE SPIRIT, and LIFE. Why doubt Jesus ?

 

[Tomb523]

The food to eat that you do not know of ' is what ?

"Food you do not know of..." is the story of the lady at the well and using scripture to interpret scripture, when Jesus was tempted by Satan to turn stones into bread, Jesus answered, 'Man does not live by bread alone, but by the very word of God." So this food Jesus was given was not of the common type we think of, but he is sustained in spreading God's word and doing of God's will, more important than the food the disciples carried.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

"Food you do not know of..." is the story of the lady at the well and using scripture to interpret scripture, when Jesus was tempted by Satan to turn stones into bread, Jesus answered, 'Man does not live by bread alone, but by the very word of God." So this food Jesus was given was not of the common type we think of, but he is sustained in spreading God's word and doing of God's will, more important than the food the disciples carried.

You have the right idea.
Jesus then TOLD HIS DISCIPLES what the food is, directly. (in context of your quote)

He did not say specifically He or anyone else would have 'food' / be sustained in spreading God's Word ,
but as Jesus says:
yes, "My Food Is To Do The Will of My Father"

 

[ubicaritas]

"Food you do not know of..." is the story of the lady at the well and using scripture to interpret scripture, when Jesus was tempted by Satan to turn stones into bread, Jesus answered, 'Man does not live by bread alone, but by the very word of God." So this food Jesus was given was not of the common type we think of, but he is sustained in spreading God's word and doing of God's will, more important than the food the disciples carried.

The Lord's Supper is not common food and the eating is of a spiritual or supernatural nature.

God cares about our material as well as spiritual needs which is why the sacrament has a material component and both are an indissoluble aspect of the holy and divine mystery. We Lutherans are known for being "antinomian" by some misguided outsiders, but really this is considering our theology and ethics divorced from our sacraments. Our ethical life as Christians is shaped by the Lord's Supper.

 

[Tomb523]

You overlooked when I said "dissimulation".

The Lutheran approach is to take the plain, literal meaning of Scriptures seriously unless there is good reason to assume otherwise. Jesus is God and able to turn stones into children, why should we doubt that the bread is in fact his true body and the wine his true blood?

Another reason why I'm not Lutheran or any other denominational affiliation. I think the reformist movement did God's work to wrench away the bible from a man controled entity and provided it to the masses where the Holy Spirit can help us interpret. But just like the early church, even the reformist interjected their own desires and meanings into what are now denominational doctrine. As I said before, you interpret scripture with scripture. It is clear throughout the bible that blood is not to be consumed. It also says repeated that it is faith in Jesus Christ that gives us everlasting life, yet all believers must die at least once, so we don't take that literally. There is a lot in the bible we don't take literally, so why fall on our sword over this, especially in light of other scripture? Finally, Jesus does say eat my flesh and drink my blood, but He doesn't say it will become me in you or anything remotely like that. Feast and fasts are used to recognize what God has done for those who chose to follow Him. The last supper continued that tradition, but there was nothing, stated or implied, that made it a supernatural event.

 

[Tomb523]

The Lord's Supper is not common food and the eating is of a spiritual or supernatural nature.

But it is! It is the traditional Passover feast commanded by God to celebrate the rescue from slavery. Again as I said in my original post, it was Jewish tradition to give thanks and blessing at the start of the meal with bread (unleavened at Passover) and at the end of the meal with wine. To say it wasn't common food is to disregard all of the traditions of the culture quite literally established by God. Jesus is a Jew through and through and He ministered to Jews and He obeyed Jewish traditions. There is nothing in scripture that indicates the food was supernatural.

 

[ubicaritas]

Another reason why I'm not Lutheran or any other denominational affiliation. I think the reformist movement did God's work to wrench away the bible from a man controled entity and provided it to the masses where the Holy Spirit can help us interpret. But just like the early church, even the reformist interjected their own desires and meanings into what are now denominational doctrine. As I said before, you interpret scripture with scripture. It is clear throughout the bible that blood is not to be consumed. It also says repeated that it is faith in Jesus Christ that gives us everlasting life, yet all believers must die at least once, so we don't take that literally. There is a lot in the bible we don't take literally, so why fall on our sword over this, especially in light of other scripture? Finally, Jesus does say eat my flesh and drink my blood, but He doesn't say it will become me in you or anything remotely like that. Feast and fasts are used to recognize what God has done for those who chose to follow Him. The last supper continued that tradition, but there was nothing, stated or implied, that made it a supernatural event.

The way I see it, you are basically saying you use selective readings of the Bible to make up your own religion by rejecting "denominationalism" rather than reading the Bible confessionally, you eschew the wisdom found within the saints across time. This is chronological snobbery, my friend.

Lutherans are not a sect or a denomination. We are the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. The Augsburg Confession ends with an appeal to the emperor that he would recognize that our faith is the same faith as the Apostles, Martyrs, and Fathers of the Church, the same faith once delivered to the saints. Our interpretation of the Scripture is not based on ad hoc rationalizations.

 

[ubicaritas]

But it is! It is the traditional Passover feast commanded by God to celebrate the rescue from slavery. Again as I said in my original post, it was Jewish tradition to give thanks and blessing at the start of the meal with bread (unleavened at Passover) and at the end of the meal with wine. To say it wasn't common food is to disregard all of the traditions of the culture quite literally established by God. Jesus is a Jew through and through and He ministered to Jews and He obeyed Jewish traditions. There is nothing in scripture that indicates the food was supernatural.

The Lord's Supper is a type of the Pesach or Passover meal. Jews do not regard the Passover meal as common food but they see it as participation in the same Passover from Egypt, including using the present tense of verbs.

 

[Tomb523]

The way I see it, you are basically saying you use selective readings of the Bible to make up your own religion by rejecting "denominationalism" rather than reading the Bible confessionally, you eschew the wisdom found within the saints across time. This is chronological snobbery, my friend.

Lutherans are not a sect or a denomination. We are the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. The Augsburg Confession ends with an appeal to the emperor that he would recognize that our faith is the same faith as the Apostles, Martyrs, and Fathers of the Church, the same faith once delivered to the saints. Our interpretation of the Scripture is not based on ad hoc rationalizations.

Yea, sorry, you're a denomination. Catholics say the same thing. As to "you eschewing the wisdom found within the saints" Who are the saints to which you refer? Paul specifically identifies all believers as saints. "Selective readings?" no, I read the bible in its entire context as I have tried to tell you when I've said, interpret scripture with scripture. If you want to talk about literal vs figurative interpretation, had the gospels said something like, "And Jesus took a knife, cutting of pieces of his flesh and given to the disciples..." or "As they consumed the bread, they felt its taste and texture to take on a meat like quality..." then I'd say you'd have a literal interpretation. But it says he took bread and said, "this is by body" and in that context it is obviously symbolic.

"readings of the Bible to make up your own religion by rejecting "denominationalism" rather than reading the Bible confessionally," Aren't you doing the same thing by saying all others are wrong except Lutherans? Or at least your following someone who has made up their own religion and eschewing the wisdom of other saints.

"The Augsburg Confession ends with an appeal to the emperor that he would recognize that our faith is the same faith as the Apostles, Martyrs, and Fathers of the Church, the same faith once delivered to the saints. Our interpretation of the Scripture is not based on ad hoc rationalizations." Sure they are and they ignore the culture from which Jesus came. . "An appeal to the emperor" - so that means your beliefs are recognized by an earthly power and not necessarily by God. Not much of a recommendation.

 

[ubicaritas]

We simply believe in saying what the Scriptures say and being silent where they are silent. Jesus said "this is my body", not "this is a symbol of my body".

 

[Tomb523]

And that's not a bad start, but when he said "this is my body", it quite obviously was not actually His body, but unleavened bread meant to "Represent" his body or be symbolic of his body. The literal interpretation here is beyond contextual reality and it's not supported by any other scripture in either the OT or NT. Context, context, context!

Feel free to believe what you want; however, if I am moved by the Holy Spirit to challenge a position offered publicly, I must obey.

 

[ubicaritas]

It's not obvious to me since Jesus is God. It may be obvious to you but I think we share different religious presuppositions about how God works in the world.

You seem to be favoring a gnostic perspective that created matter is not fitting for the divine, whereas the Lutheran perspective is much as the Catholic or Ortohdox perspective, that it was for this reason that God became flesh and blood, to take on all the limitations inherent in being created and to communicate his grace to us through his own corporal existence. Incarnational spirituality is a major theme in our church, as well as the Orthodox and Catholic communions and some Anglicans.

 

[Tutorman]

If as you say was the case that the Holy Eucharist was a mere symbol than no one would get sick from eating unworthily but if Christ Real Presence was in the elements than the passage about being sick by partaking unworthily makes sense. The idea that the elements were just symbolic did not come around until the Protestant Reformation was well under way and you will not find any evidence that the Eucharist was just mere symbols in the early Church. In Fact St. John's (the John who walked with Jesus and wrote four NT books) disciple St. Ignatius of Antioch from the very early Church says these things:


"Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."

"Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

"Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ."

-"Letter to the Ephesians", paragraph 20, c. 80-110 A.D.

"I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed."

-"Letter to the Romans", paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.

"Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons."

-Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.

So for me and my house we will follow the Early Church not some man that taught heterodoxy in the middle ages

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

That first sentence is false in spirit and logically.

More people get in deep trouble thinking it is real bllod and real fllesh, than realizing the truth what Jesus said "spirit and life".

 

[Tomb523]

You seem to be favoring a gnostic perspective that created matter is not fitting for the divine, .

Not gnostic in the perspective that if we are spiritually in-tune with God, our fleshly behavior isn't important. It's also not about matter not being fitting for the divine, but our fleshly bodies are not fit. This is why we must die so that our new bodies can be transfigured for entry into heaven. Our new bodies are still matter. They exist in time and space just as Jesus' new body existed and was touched by Apostles and He even ate and drank prior to His ascension. I cannot even begin to speculate on what that matter consisted of, but it was a transfigured body. I even believe that when Adam and Eve were first created, they had heavenly compatible bodies, but after the fall, they were transfigured to what we have today. The bible is very clear on our bodies that will go to heaven:
Philippians 3:21 ESV

Who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself.


1 Corinthians 15:44 - It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
Jesus said He was flesh and blood as he invited the Apostles to touch Him, but it was glorified flesh and blood, not the natural one He died in.

 

[Tomb523]

So for me and my house we will follow the Early Church not some man that taught heterodoxy in the middle ages

By exploring the Jewish roots of Christianity, I believe I am following, not the "Early Church", but the first century Church as advocated by Jesus and the Apostles. History would indicate that once the gentiles were "kicked out" of the synagogues, they developed their own brand of Christianity that resembled little the true nature of the intended Church. One strong example of this is the concept that we are now in the age of grace; however, the thanksgiving scroll from the dead sea scrolls clearly shows salvation by grace was a long held Jewish concept.

But by all means, enjoy the kool-aid.