Real Presence in Lord's Supper and the Second Coming. Contradiction?

[jinc1019]

Good Morning,

I'm very interested in the debate between Reformed theologians and Lutheran theologians. I believe these two branches of Christianity are the closest to teachings of the Apostles, and I've long considered joining each, but I still have some issues that remain unresolved.

One of those is the Lord's Supper and Christ's presence. I understand the Lutheran arguments in favor of the real, local presence of Christ, and I don't agree with those Reformed theologians who insist Jesus can't be locally present because of his human nature, but one thing I do have a hard time understanding is how Lutherans (and others who hold to the real presence view) can reconcile that position with the many passages of scripture talking about Christ's second coming as a future event. If Christ is coming again and we are all awaiting that second coming, how can he already be here in the Lord's Supper?

Are there any convincing arguments on this point that you can point me toward or present here? Any external sources? Thanks for your time!

-Justin

 

[FireDragon76]

In Christ's second coming, as confessed in the creeds, Christ's presence will be evident to all. In the Lord's Supper, Christ's presence is only known by faith. Does that make sense?

 

[jinc1019]

In Christ's second coming, as confessed in the creeds, Christ's presence will be evident to all. In the Lord's Supper, Christ's presence is only known by faith. Does that make sense?

It makes sense, but why do you believe that? Is this addressed somewhere in the Book of Concord or elsewhere?

 

[FireDragon76]

It makes sense, but why do you believe that? Is this addressed somewhere in the Book of Concord or elsewhere?

To my knowledge, no.

Though, Christ's presence in the supper is an invisible and supernatural presence. That's Lutheran doctrine. So, there's going to be differences in how Christ is present in the Lord's Supper versus his final Parousia. But a scholastic distinction as some of the Reformed have made rests on a lot of metaphysical speculation about the nature of bodies and so forth.

 

[jinc1019]

Interesting, thanks. I'm just not sure how you can reconcile the idea that Christ is going to come again physically with the idea he's here physically all the time, just in a different way. Where in scripture do you see this other physical coming that's not like the final one?

 

[FireDragon76]

Lutheranism, like a lot of other ancient Christian traditions, accepts mystery and paradox. It doesn't have to be perfectly worked out for me to accept they are true.

Secondly, I never said Jesus is physically with us all the time. That's not what the sacrament of the Lord's Supper implies. His presence is a sacramental presence mediated by his words and physical objects of bread and wine. It is a different mode than his second coming.

While I believe the Scriptures are the final authority, I also have a higher value for church tradition. I believe the Augsburg Confession is a particular expression of the catholic, apostolic faith- that is why I believe it. And honestly I do not see the Reformed doctrine expressed in the earliest centuries, it is an innovation based on humanistic speculation into what was always considered a sacred mystery.

Let's put it this way, if Lutheranism is wrong on this point, then the alternative would not be to accept the Reformed or Baptist doctrine. The alternative for me would be to abandon the Christian faith. If God does not provide tangible means for my salvation, and not just tokens, then I don't think Christianity would be very persuasive. We're physical beings, after all, and a religious ideology that sees no place for the physical mediating the spiritual is something that I find inauthentic, unreal, and irrelevant. One might as well be a Muslim or Deist, in that case.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Interesting, thanks. I'm just not sure how you can reconcile the idea that Christ is going to come again physically with the idea he's here physically all the time, just in a different way. Where in scripture do you see this other physical coming that's not like the final one?

When Christ returns, He returns in glory, "to judge the quick and the dead, and His coming will have no end". Christ's corporeal presence in the Sacrament of the Table is available to us now, as we wait and anticipate His coming in future glory at the consummation of history. The Eucharist isn't a return or Parousia, but the Sacramental and Mysterious real presence of Jesus Christ in and under the bread and wine which unites us to Him, His Sacrifice, nourishing our faith, with the forgiveness of sins, etc; Christ's return, His Parousia, on the Last Day is in judgment, to bring conclusion to history, to raise the dead, and to bring all things to their intended end: the renewal of all creation, the restoration of all things, the life everlasting in the age to come.

The Book of Concord wouldn't address this because there's never been an occasion where these things have been conflated or confused; these are very concretely distinct things.

When we receive the Lord's Supper, Jesus isn't returning as He ascended (as the angels promised would happen), but the Lord of all who is seated at the right hand of the Father is now, by a mystery comprehended and apprehended only by faith, indeed really and truly present here in and under the meager signs of bread and wine. When He does return, in glory, as judge of the living and the dead it is as described above, every eye shall see Him, it is in judgment, and for the renewal and restoration of creation.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Tangible]

ViaCrucis nails it as usual. They are two different modes of presence. Lutheran theologians have spoken about how Christ's presence is not just presence for its own sake, but that He is present in different modes for specific purposes. Lutherans like to talk about what Christ is present FOR.

He is present under the bread and wine of Communion in order to bring to each individual Christian his presence for the forgiveness of sins and the building up of faith, to deliver to each one of us in our body the token and the price of our salvation.

He has also promised to be present in his Church until the end of the age, coming to us as the Word and in the Word that existed with God before all things. When he returns in glory, he will be present to bring an end to this age, to render final judgment on the living and the dead, and to usher in the new heavens and new earth for all eternity.

 

[PanDeVida]

Good Morning,

I'm very interested in the debate between Reformed theologians and Lutheran theologians. I believe these two branches of Christianity are the closest to teachings of the Apostles, and I've long considered joining each, but I still have some issues that remain unresolved.

One of those is the Lord's Supper and Christ's presence. I understand the Lutheran arguments in favor of the real, local presence of Christ, and I don't agree with those Reformed theologians who insist Jesus can't be locally present because of his human nature, but one thing I do have a hard time understanding is how Lutherans (and others who hold to the real presence view) can reconcile that position with the many passages of scripture talking about Christ's second coming as a future event. If Christ is coming again and we are all awaiting that second coming, how can he already be here in the Lord's Supper?

Are there any convincing arguments on this point that you can point me toward or present here? Any external sources? Thanks for your time!

-Justin

jinc, your argument should be with Jesus Christ, I say this because have you not read Matthew 26:26-27

Matthew 26And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. 27And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. 28For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins

Jinc. WELL, Jesus Christ was present when He stated:Take ye, and eat. This is my body & Was present when he stated:For Drink ye my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.

Jinc, if Jesus Could tell His Disciples to eat and drink His Body and Blood while He was present in human form then Christ second coming, He is also in the Lords Supper. Jesus Christ is Omnipresent. Amen

So Yeah! if this is not convincing then nothing will be.