Lords supper is symbolic

[Tangible]

Eucharist is based on supposition of Paul who said that Jesus asked that to be performed as a remembrance. Jesus never said so. It is spiritually symbolic when based on John 6.

This "supposition" also appears in Luke's Gospel, BTW. Do you believe this "supposition" was inerrantly inspired by the Holy Spirit? Anamnesis is not mere remembrance, any way.

 

[Tangible]

So are you saying that the Lord is promoting canabalism?

You should probably at least try to grasp the basic points of the Real Presence before trying to form a cogent argument against it.

 

[Rajni]

Christ says "This is my body...... this is my blood" He doesn't say "this is a symbol of my body.... this represents my blood"

Although, in an old anti-drug commercial, they show butter sizzling in a frying pan and the voice-over says "This is drugs". Then, an egg is dropped into the sizzling pan and the voice-over says, "This is your brain on drugs." We know it to be a metaphor without the voice-over having to articulate that "This is a symbol of drugs / This is a symbol of your brain on drugs". Could be the same thing in that verse.

I will admit that I find the insistence that it's more than a symbol gets contradicted in churches which insist that one must have one's sins cleansed through the confessional first before receiving communion. It's like cleaning the house before the professional cleaning service comes. If, indeed, it's more than a symbol, and if, indeed, it literally is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of God Himself, and if (as the Catechism also teaches) sin cannot stand in the presence of God, then receiving it should do just as much good -- if not more -- than the confessional would.

 

[Panevino]

Although, in an old anti-drug commercial, they show butter sizzling in a frying pan and the voice-over says "This is drugs". Then, an egg is dropped into the sizzling pan and the voice-over says, "This is your brain on drugs." We know it to be a metaphor without the voice-over having to articulate that "This is a symbol of drugs / This is a symbol of your brain on drugs". Could be the same thing in that verse.

I will admit that I find the insistence that it's more than a symbol gets contradicted in churches which insist that one must have one's sins cleansed through the confessional first before receiving communion. It's like cleaning the house before the professional cleaning service comes. If, indeed, it's more than a symbol, and if, indeed, it literally is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of God Himself, and if (as the Catechism also teaches) sin cannot stand in the presence of God, then receiving it should do just as much good -- if not more -- than the confessional would.

1 Corinthians 11:26-29

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


Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

 

[wilts43]

No one has tested the Catholic eucharist in a lab and discovered the genetic profile or DNA sequencing of Christ the Messiah.

Well they have actually. From different Eucharistic miracles laboratories have unknowingly, blind-tested and found Living, human heart tissue, AB blood (rare except in Jews) and human DNA. They can never get code from the DNA. You need to have had a human mother & father to have a codeable DNA.

There are plenty of Eucharistic miracles that have been tested......for the open-minded.

 

[Greg Merrill]

You should probably at least try to grasp the basic points of the Real Presence before trying to form a cogent argument against it.

You didn't answer my question "Was Jesus promoting canabalism?"

 

[W2L]

I believe that the Lords supper is symbolic, just as the bread of life is symbolic (John 6).

 

[wilts43]

To those who rely on the OT condemnation on drinking blood to persist in denying the Real Presence.
Do you observe all the other statutes of the OT.
Eg abstain from pork?
Do you insist on circumcision?

Leviticus 17:14"You must not eat the blood of any creature, because the life of every creature is its blood; anyone who eats it must be cut off.

This is preparatory for the NT when Christ will say His life is in His blood.

In concert with this, those old restictions are lifted.
Acts 10 14“No, Lord!” Peter answered, “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.” 15The voice spoke to him a second time: “Do not call anything impure” that God has made clean. 16This happened three times, and all at once the sheet was taken back up into heaven

Mark 7:19
because it does not enter his heart, but it goes into his stomach and then is eliminated." (Thus all foods are clean.)
------------------------------------------------------------

In the end though the Protestant (not Lutheran) position is unassailable. Any text, no matter how insistent, or rich in signs and miracles, can be reduced to "symbolic".
The Bible is alledgedly raised as the final arbiter but in reality it is always the reader, not the text.

 

[Albion]

Although, in an old anti-drug commercial, they show butter sizzling in a frying pan and the voice-over says "This is drugs". Then, an egg is dropped into the sizzling pan and the voice-over says, "This is your brain on drugs." We know it to be a metaphor without the voice-over having to articulate that "This is a symbol of drugs / This is a symbol of your brain on drugs". Could be the same thing in that verse.

I will admit that I find the insistence that it's more than a symbol gets contradicted in churches which insist that one must have one's sins cleansed through the confessional first before receiving communion. It's like cleaning the house before the professional cleaning service comes. If, indeed, it's more than a symbol, and if, indeed, it literally is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of God Himself, and if (as the Catechism also teaches) sin cannot stand in the presence of God, then receiving it should do just as much good -- if not more -- than the confessional would.

I get your point, but of course it only handles a few churches. Many others do not mandate any private confession of sins prior to receiving Communion, yet they still do believe the sacrament to be more than symbolic.

 

[wilts43]

Can anyone cite the Bible verse that says that the Eucharist in the Lords supper is symbolic? Catholics believe it is literally Christ's body and blood. Protestants say it is a symbol. Can anyone show where the Bible says it is a symbol?

"No" is the answer.....it seems.

 

[Rajni]

1 Corinthians 11:26-29

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


Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

Exactly, this verse is a great example of this conundrum. Sin cannot stand in God's presence, which, if indeed the Eucharist is what it's said to be, would be obliterated upon ingestion of the latter.

If it's just a symbol, I could understand the need for being all cleaned up before receiving it, but if it's literally the Lord, Whose presence sin can't withstand, that's where the confusion starts.

In fact, since Jesus takes away the sins of the world, it makes even more sense that receiving communion (literally receiving God and reliving the act that took away sin) would do the job that the confessional is, meanwhile, said to do.

 

[Tangible]

You didn't answer my question "Was Jesus promoting canabalism?"

It's actually a violation of CF rules to accuse Christians who believe in the Real Presence of practicing cannibalism.

But to answer your question, here is a good statement of what the Real Presence is all about.

The Lord's Supper, otherwise known as the Sacrament of the Altar, the Eucharist, or Holy Communion, is the Sacrament by which Jesus Christ sustains our faith. It is the sustaining Sacrament. This is a most profound mystery. According to his own words, the resurrected and ascended Jesus gives His entire true body and true blood, in, with, and under consecrated bread and wine, to every communicant to eat and to drink to assure them of the forgiveness of sins and promise of eternal life. He gives that forgiveness and eternal life He won in the death and resurrection of His body. (Matthew 26:26-28; Mark14:22-24; Luke 22:14-20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26; 1 Corinthians 10:16) This is not cannibalism. Yet, in a mystery, Christ does give His true body and true blood in the bread and wine for Christians to eat and to drink. He does not do this for bodily nourishment, but for spiritual nourishment. He does this to provide a concrete and tangible assurance of forgiveness and salvation to each communicant personally. And since this Sacrament is a deep mystery that makes no sense to human reason, it requires faith to believe that what Christ promises is true, in spite of the fact that what He is saying seems impossible. This is consistent with being saved by faith alone. Taking Christ at His word as to what He says this Sacrament is exercises and strengthens saving faith which trusts Christ's Word and rests in His forgiveness and power alone. We receive this Sacrament in sorrow for sin, as God defines it, in a desire to turn away from it, and in faith in Christ and in His words regarding what this Sacrament is and what he gives through it.

Our Saviour Lutheran Church

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

The Eucharist is both symbolic and mystical. Also, the Eucharist in the Orthodox Church is understood to be the genuine Body and Blood of Christ, precisely because bread and wine are the mysteries and symbols of God's true and genuine presence and his manifestation to us in Christ.

The mystery of the Holy Eucharist defies analysis and explanation in purely rational and logical terms. For the Eucharist, as Christ himself, is a mystery of the Kingdom of Heaven which, as Jesus has told us, is "not of this world." The Eucharist, because it belongs to God's Kingdom, is truly free from the earth-born "logic" of fallen humanity.

From John of Damascus: "If you enquire how this happens, it is enough for you to learn that it is through the Holy Spirit ... we know nothing more than this, that the word of God is true, active, and omnipotent, but in its manner of operation unsearchable".

 

[Monk Brendan]

He broke a piece of matzah, and while sitting there with his disciples said, "this is my body." The point being there... he was sitting there with them... he was handing them the piece of unleavened bread and so the bread wasn't his body, it was being handed to the disciples from his body. Therefore, it is a symbol for what he would do... and for us... what he did.

He is also God. He can do anything. If He wanted to give His disciples some matzah, and He wanted it to be His body as well, can't He do that? He is, after all, God.

 

[Monk Brendan]

I certainly don't disagree with you but the question is.. is it his literal blood and body.

YES!

This is a mystery! We are not supposed to UNDERSTAND it. How can you understand God's love, which gave you salvation? None of us is big enough to even attempt to understand God. Most of us know, from reading the Bible, how to get to heaven. But to truly understand God? We are not big enough! There is not room enough in our mind, body, soul or spirit for us to be able to understand little more than a fraction of 1% of what God is. Even if it looks like it is breaking His law, it is, after all, His creation, and His rules.

If He wants us to eat His Body or drink His Blood, He can (and has) told us that it is right to do.

 

[Monk Brendan]

the RCC position

Ken, it is not just the RCC position. It is also the position of ALL of the Pre-Reformation Churches, Orthodox, Eastern Catholic of various flavors, Coptic, Armenian, and more. ALL of the Churches that were before the Reformation believed in the same thing. "Symbolic" only comes in AFTER the Reformation.

BTW, Luther preached it, too.

 

[Monk Brendan]

Not, "do this because it is me," but "do this in order to remember me." That is the word you are looking for. When you factor in that his body had not been beaten and his blood not been shared... when he sat in the flesh saying "this is my body" and "this is my blood" then we have symbols, not the literal thing. His body WOULD BE broken and his blood WOULD BE shed... so when he said it, it was clearly a symbol and not the literal thing. We do it to remember the literal thing, but the thing we do simply POINTS to the literal thing. The wine causes us to remember his blood, the bread to remind us of his body... just symbols that point to and remind us of the real thing.

God works outside of time. Eternal means without time. Why should our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ limit Himself to just what is happening at the moment of the Last Supper, and NOT to all of time. Just as Jesus, when He died, descended to hell, and there preached the Good News, and trampling death by His death and bestowing eternal life on anyone who would accept His sacrificial death as a ticket out of hell, then why would the Eucharist--the Mystery He began on the night of Holy Thursday, be just for that night? Or be symbolic?

That's something I can't understand about the Reformers. Everything in the Old and New Testaments are supposed to be literal, but when they come to the Last Supper (Or John 6, or 1 Cor 11:23-25), it MUST BE SYMBOLIC!!! Was Zwingli so afraid of looking TOO CATHOLIC? Anybody want to try to answer that one?

 

[Monk Brendan]

Something tells me Father Jacobsen would be rather offended if I walked into mass and started lapping up the holy water

In Eastern Catholic and Orthodox traditions, Holy Water is supposed to be drunk, as well as used to bless yourself, or others.

 

[Tangible]

BTW, Luther preached it, too.

And his theological descendants still do!

 

[Phil 1:21]

In Eastern Catholic and Orthodox traditions, Holy Water is supposed to be drunk, as well as used to bless yourself, or others.

No kidding? This I did not know. Thanks for the info. Much appreciated.