Presence of Christ in the Eucharist

[jdbrown]

It is my understanding that the Lutheran view of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist is a real bodily presence, correct? The phrase "in, with and under" is used as opposed to the Roman understanding of transubstantiation. Does the "in, with and under" indicate a localized presence or is there some other sense in which Christ is present? I understand that when Jesus says "this is My body" that the "is" has to mean something.

 

[DaRev]

It is my understanding that the Lutheran view of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist is a real bodily presence, correct? The phrase "in, with and under" is used as opposed to the Roman understanding of transubstantiation. Does the "in, with and under" indicate a localized presence or is there some other sense in which Christ is present? I understand that when Jesus says "this is My body" that the "is" has to mean something.

"Is" means "is". When Jesus said "Take, eat, this is My body" that is exactly what He meant. We are given the very body and blood of Jesus into our mouths to eat and drink for the forgiveness of our sins. The bread that we receive before the altar is the body of Christ. The wine we receive at the altar is the blood of Christ. Lutherans do not attempt to explain the mechanics because Jesus doesn't tell us the mechanics. It simply is what He says it is.

 

[jdbrown]

Lutherans do not attempt to explain the mechanics because Jesus doesn't tell us the mechanics. It simply is what He says it is.

I have always liked this trait of Lutheran Theology.


Ironically, John Calvin said something similar:

"When God closes His holy mouth, I will desist from inquiry."


If only more people took it to heart.

 

[filosofer]

I have always liked this trait of Lutheran Theology.


Ironically, John Calvin said something similar:

"When God closes His holy mouth, I will desist from inquiry."


If only more people took it to heart.

Unfortunately, Calvin didn’t do that with the Lord’s Supper, and said we had to ascend into heaven to partake of Christ’s body and blood, because it cannot be but in one place at one time.

 

[timur123456789]

Bread and win is LITERALLY the body of Christ ?

If so what does the it mean to be LITERALLY the body of Christ ?

 

[Moses Medina]

Edit-(DaRev gave a clearer answer)

 

[DaRev]

Bread and win is LITERALLY the body of Christ ?

The wine is the blood of Christ.

If so what does the it mean to be LITERALLY the body of Christ?

Exactly what it says.

 

[Luther073082]

It is my understanding that the Lutheran view of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist is a real bodily presence, correct? The phrase "in, with and under" is used as opposed to the Roman understanding of transubstantiation. Does the "in, with and under" indicate a localized presence or is there some other sense in which Christ is present? I understand that when Jesus says "this is My body" that the "is" has to mean something.

In layman's terms, the Roman Catholic view of the Real presence states that the bread and the wine are completely replaced by the body and blood of Christ. Therefore the bread is just body and the wine is just blood.

The Lutheran view does not go as deep into explaining it and we allow that the bread can be both bread and the body of Christ at the same time and the wine can be both wine and the blood of Christ at the time time.

The Roman Catholic view attempts to explain the process beyond what scripture supports. Scripture tells us that the body and blood of Christ are in fact physically present. How that fact relates to the original elements of bread and wine, we can't say, it's a mystery of the faith.

 

[Luther073082]

Bread and win is LITERALLY the body of Christ ?

If so what does the it mean to be LITERALLY the body of Christ ?

It is literally and physically the body and blood of Christ. I'm not sure how much clearer that can be.

 

[alexnbethmom]

It is literally and physically the body and blood of Christ. I'm not sure how much clearer that can be.

it must be really slow or boring in the other forums.....that's the only thing i can think of....

 

[Cappadocious]

In layman's terms, the Roman Catholic view of the Real presence states that the bread and the wine are completely replaced by the body and blood of Christ.

Well, except for the accidents.

 

[timur123456789]

The wine is the blood of Christ.



Exactly what it says.

It is literally and physically the body and blood of Christ. I'm not sure how much clearer that can be.

So that means that you are eating the whole person with all the intestines, fingers, bones and carliges ?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

So that means that you are eating the whole person with all the intestines, fingers, bones and carliges ?

The word is cartilage and no, we're not. What a silly question. We're eating a piece of bread that is Jesus' body. We are drinking wine that is Jesus' blood.

How do YOU interpret "take and eat, this IS my body" and "take and drink, this IS my blood"?

 

[timur123456789]

The word is cartilage and no, we're not. What a silly question. We're eating a piece of bread that is Jesus' body. We are drinking wine that is Jesus' blood.

How do YOU interpret "take and eat, this IS my body" and "take and drink, this IS my blood"?

This is why I am confused when you say LITERALLY the body and blood... but the body consitsts of cartilages, bones, nerves , blood vessels, eyes, nose, etc

are you eating the whole body like that LITERALLY ?

Or it is NOT literally ?

By Blood and Body I understand truth and goodness from the Lord that nourishes us.

 

[DaRev]

By Blood and Body I understand truth and goodness from the Lord that nourishes us.

But Jesus didn't say "Take, eat, this is My body which really means truth and goodness." He said "Take, eat, this is My body." That is what He says. That is what He meant. That is all we say because it is all he said. We don't add to His words or take away from His words.

 

[timur123456789]

But Jesus didn't say "Take, eat, this is My body which really means truth and goodness." He said "Take, eat, this is My body." That is what He says. That is what He meant. That is all we say because it is all he said. We don't add to His words or take away from His words.

This is why I am confused when you say LITERALLY the body and blood... but the body consitsts of cartilages, bones, nerves , blood vessels, eyes, nose, etc

are you eating the whole body like that LITERALLY ?

 

[alexnbethmom]

This is why I am confused when you say LITERALLY the body and blood... but the body consitsts of cartilages, bones, nerves , blood vessels, eyes, nose, etc

are you eating the whole body like that LITERALLY ?

i honestly don't understand what part of "this IS my body" and "this IS my blood" you don't get.

it must be very boring in the other parts of the forum.

 

[bulldog129]

Jesus simply said, "take eat, this is my body" and "take drink, this is my blood." We do not try to explain how this can be, we simply believe what God has told us.

 

[DaRev]

This is why I am confused when you say LITERALLY the body and blood... but the body consitsts of cartilages, bones, nerves , blood vessels, eyes, nose, etc

are you eating the whole body like that LITERALLY ?

Read John 6:51-59. We take Jesus at His word. That should answer your question.

 

[jdbrown]

How would Lutheranism deal with the I AM's of Jesus? Such as "I AM the door", "I AM the true vine", etc.