The real presence, how does it work.

Akita Suggagaki · Mar 3, 2023

Every material thing has a deeper reality than our senses can reveal to us. Yes, even matter is fundamentally mystery and only theory takes us down into the quantum level and even theory cannot take us beyond that. I think most of us here can agree that all matter has its origin in God. Some of us see that as not only temporal at point of creation but enduring and sustaining. Is it possible that at some deeper level a change takes place wherein the quality of divine presence is enhanced? I think so.

BobRyan · Mar 3, 2023

Akita Suggagaki said:
That seems to be the implication of "transubstantiation". Unless we think of substance more idealistically. As in the substance of an argument or an explanation, the substance of a belief or a world view.

It seems to be that they "came up" with it at a time when nobody knew about atom's and then had to adapt to to something like 'this is a carbon atom specifically for human bone" or "specifically for bread" or specifically for "a certain person"... as if Carbon atoms are different depending on their source. They were clueless about the idea that food provides carbon atoms and we use them in our bodies.

In fact most of our cells get physically recycled every 7 years.

Xeno.of.athens · Mar 3, 2023

BobRyan said:
It seems to be that they "came up" with it at a time when nobody knew about atom's and then had to adapt to to something like 'this is a carbon atom specifically for human bone" or "specifically for bread" or specifically for "a certain person"... as if Carbon atoms are different depending on their source. They were clueless about the idea that food provides carbon atoms and we use them in our bodies.

In fact most of our cells get physically recycled every 7 years.

All very interesting in its own way, but not very relevant to the question posed in the original post.

If I am not mistaken @BobRyan, Seventh Day Adventists do not teach the real presence in their doctrine about the Lord's supper. Is that correct?

BobRyan · Mar 3, 2023

Akita Suggagaki said:
That seems to be the implication of "transubstantiation". Unless we think of substance more idealistically. As in the substance of an argument or an explanation, the substance of a belief or a world view.

It seems to be that they "came up" with it at a time when nobody knew about atom's and then had to adapt to to something like 'this is a carbon atom specifically for human bone" or "specifically for bread" or specifically for "a certain person"... as if Carbon atoms are different depending on their source. They were clueless about the idea that food provides carbon atoms and we use them in our bodies.

In fact most of our cells get physically recycled every 7 years.

Xeno.of.athens said:
All very interesting in its own way, but not very relevant to the question posed in the original post.

I was responding to Adita's specifica post - as my post shows.

Xeno.of.athens said:
If I am not mistaken @BobRyan, Seventh Day Adventists do not teach the real presence in their doctrine

Actually we do teach the real presence when "two or three are gathered in His name" as I posted earlier. #32

BobRyan said:
Well if as we see here #31 -- "confecting the body,blood, soul, divinity" of Christ is a tradition without Bible basis - what about the "Real presence"?

Is there a "real presence" teaching in the Bible?

Matt 18:20 For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”

Turns out - no "confecting" needed at all.

And in the case of each Christian - we have this

Col 1:27 To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.

Xeno.of.athens · Mar 4, 2023

BobRyan said:
Actually we do teach the real presence when "two or three are gathered in His name" as I posted earlier. #32

I see, so by "real presence" you mean "spiritually present among the people". One hopes that the difference between the ancient church's meaning for "real presence" and the kind of presence that you believe, is obvious to all.

Jipsah · Mar 7, 2023

BobRyan said:
Actually we do teach the real presence when "two or three are gathered in His name" as I posted earlier. #32

I.E, "No"

BobRyan · Mar 7, 2023

sometimes when people see --
Matt 18:20 For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”

They innexplicably reply "no".

I am not one of those.

BobRyan · Mar 7, 2023

Xeno.of.athens said:
I see, so by "real presence" you mean "spiritually present among the people".

We mean that Christ says "I AM THERE in their midst".

Xeno.of.athens said:
One hopes that the difference between the ancient church's meaning for "real presence" and the kind of presence that you believe, is obvious to all.

Indeed I would hope so - since I am going with the NT text - and so the ancient church of the first century

BobRyan said:
sometimes when people see --
Matt 18:20 For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”

They innexplicably reply "no".

I am not one of those.

Jipsah · Mar 7, 2023

BobRyan said:
sometimes when people see --
Matt 18:20 For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”

They innexplicably reply "no".

I am not one of those.

You reserve your "no" as your reply when our Lord says "Take, eat, this is My Body." (This is where you say "Nobody bit Jesus, hurr hurr hurr!" by way of reply.)

saurab · Mar 25, 2023

rituals are not the way to grace.Jesus does not care for rituals like transubstantiation. He cares for purity of thought and feeling and action and faih in God ONLY and absolutely nothing else, least of all rituals.

Akita Suggagaki · Mar 25, 2023

saurab said:
rituals are not the way to grace.Jesus does not care for rituals like transubstantiation. He cares for purity of thought and feeling and action and faih in God ONLY and absolutely nothing else, least of all rituals.

'Only"? As if faith is somehow disconnected with anything else in our lives? Don't you understand that it is all interrelated? Let me suggest that faith is the fundamental unifying principle in the life of a Christian that gives order to thoughts, feelings as well as deed which include rituals. we can't avoid rituals. We have many of them in many aspects of our lives.

James 2:8 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds.

Xeno.of.athens · Mar 25, 2023

saurab said:
rituals like transubstantiation

Transubstantiation is not a ritual.

BobRyan · Mar 26, 2023

Jipsah said:
You reserve your "no" as your reply when our Lord says "Take, eat, this is My Body." (This is where you say "Nobody bit Jesus, hurr hurr hurr!" by way of reply.)

I say "notice Bible details" in John 6 where Jesus talks about drinking his blood and eating his body as it is 'bread falling down from heaven' - bread that already came down out of heaven.

Nobody saw literal bread coming out of heaven in John 6
Nobody bites Christ in John 6.

This is NOT just "me" saying this - every single person on this board knows those two statements are true.

Hence this post

BobRyan said:
Which is puzzling since at the actual last Supper Christ Himself was speaking - in His real body and blood - and no disciple bites Him at that supper.

Puzzling as well since in John 6 Jesus said that eating literal flesh and blood is worthless/useless when it comes to obtaining eternal life -

63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. ...
66 From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more. 67 Then Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also want to go away?”
68 But Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.
John 6 is a great example of a chapter where people are told to eat Christ's flesh - and no one bites Christ.

John begins his gospel with this same point -- John 1:14 "The WORD became FLESH"

I prefer paying attention to the Bible details - as the better solution than to keep dodging the point and merely slamming the poster who dares to point to an inconvenient Bible detail - when that detail does not fit your preferences.

...

48 I am the bread of life.

(not "some day in the future I WILL BE).

49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.”

I have not met a single Christian (and that includes Catholics) that claims that in John 6 the people were seeing Christ in the form of literal bread falling out of the sky. It is clearly symbolism .. and we all know it.

No amount of slamming the person that posts these inconvenient Bible details - causes them to vanish from the chapter.

Jipsah · Mar 26, 2023

BobRyan said:
Nobody saw literal bread coming out of heaven in John 6
Nobody bites Christ in John 6.

This is NOT just "me" saying this - every single person on this board knows those two statements are true.

And that's your argument against taking our Lord at His word.

Wow.

BobRyan · Mar 26, 2023

Nobody saw literal bread coming out of heaven in John 6
Nobody bites Christ in John 6.

This is NOT just "me" saying this - every single person on this board knows those two statements are true.

Jipsah said:
And that's your argument

I am saying it makes no sense to complain that I am making statements that everyone admits are correct in the two examples above.

Jipsah · Mar 26, 2023

BobRyan said:
Nobody saw literal bread coming out of heaven in John 6
Nobody bites Christ in John 6.

This is NOT just "me" saying this - every single person on this board knows those two statements are true.

I am saying it makes no sense to complain that I am making statements that everyone admits are correct in the two examples above.

The undeniable truth that you need so much to evade comes from our Lord Himself:

" Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you".

Your response? Feeble jokes.

BTW, still no response at all to this, I notice:

27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

Guilty of what you deny is there?

28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

Not only not discerning, but denying that there's anything there to be discerned?

Jipsah · Mar 30, 2023

BobRyan said:
sometimes when people see --
Matt 18:20 For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”

They innexplicably reply "no".

I am not one of those.

Nor is anyone else. The charge is nonsense.

BobRyan · Mar 30, 2023

BobRyan said:
sometimes when people see --
Matt 18:20 For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”

They inexplicably reply "no".

I am not one of those.

Jipsah said:
Nor is anyone else.

Until you read a few posts in that regard.

BobRyan · Mar 30, 2023

BobRyan said:
Nobody saw literal bread coming out of heaven in John 6
Nobody bites Christ in John 6.

This is NOT just "me" saying this - every single person on this board knows those two statements are true.

I am saying it makes no sense to complain that I am making statements that everyone admits are correct in the two examples above.

Indeed -- undeniable truth in that post.

Jipsah said:
The undeniable truth that you need so much

Not challenging a single statement I just made - shows us both sides agreeing to the same obvious details.

That is not rocket science.

The wild claim that basic details agreed to by all -- "is a joke" -- is never justified

BobRyan · Mar 30, 2023

Jipsah said:
BTW, still no response at all to this, I notice:

27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

It was already addressed since John 6 is the context for that statement and not the other way around.

Here again - stating the obvious.

What 1 Cor 11 did not say was that the person that comes to the Lord's table without being fully repentant - then goes out and finds Christ to shed His blood again. IT is talking about claiming the blood of Christ for forgiveness of sins in a non-serious way.

In the same way we use statements like "you have blood on your hands" to refer to a prosecutor that lets criminals run free so they can "kill again". IT does not mean that their hands have literal blood on them.

Christ was slain "once for all time" as we see in Heb 10.

The real presence, how does it work.

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

Junior Member

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

Blood Drinker

Junior Member

Junior Member

Blood Drinker

New Member

Well-Known Member

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

Junior Member

Blood Drinker

Junior Member

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Junior Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency