Verses that Protestants can't Accept

[Andres88]

"They will put you out of the places of worship. The time will come when anyone who kills you will think he is helping God" (John 16:2, NLV).

 

[servingtheking]

What about Lutherans and Anglicans, who believe that "we recieve the true body and blood" ?

Maybe most protestants, but not all protestants have a big a deal with a real presence as others.

 

[TimRout]

What about Lutherans and Anglicans, who believe that "we recieve the true body and blood" ?

Maybe most protestants, but not all protestants have a big a deal with a real presence as others.

One would need to make careful distinction between the RC doctrine of Transubstantiation, and the Lutheran doctrine of Consubstantiation.

 

[beamishboy]

What about Lutherans and Anglicans, who believe that "we recieve the true body and blood" ?

Maybe most protestants, but not all protestants have a big a deal with a real presence as others.

What about Lutherans and Anglicans, who believe that "we recieve the true body and blood" ?

Maybe most protestants, but not all protestants have a big a deal with a real presence as others.

We must always bear in mind that the 39 Articles of the Church of England call transubstantiation a superstition.

This is what it says exactly:

Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.

It goes to explain what it means to partake of the Body of Christ. It is partaken in a spiritual way - not really partaking the body as the RCs understand it.

Here's what it says:

The Body of Christ is given, taken and eaten in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith.

The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up or worshipped.

We have to be clear here because many non-Anglicans are not really familiar with how different and (if I may use the word commonly used in those times when applied to RC beliefs) repugnant one belief is to the other. Anglicans are Protestant. Anglicans have been strongly anti-RC for many centuries and have only become more tolerant not because of the theology but because the general religious climate everywhere is to be more tolerant.

 

[servingtheking]

Indeed, but my point still remains. They believe themselves (as do Lutherans) to recieve the body and blood of Jesus, not in a memorialist way even thought they do not explain the physics of it in terms of transubstantiation. Believe me I know at least from a Lutheran standpoint, Christ body is actually "in with and under" the bread and wine.

My point was simply that the original post assumed that all protestants held this spiritualist/memoralist view of the Eucharist which is false.

 

[Albion]

We must always bear in mind that the 39 Articles of the Church of England call transubstantiation a superstition.

That's so...transubstantiation was/is a superstition that had been dogmatized about 300 years only before these words were written. But We affirm the Real Presence, which was the issue.

It goes to explain what it means to partake of the Body of Christ. It is partaken in a spiritual way - not really partaking the body as the RCs understand it.

Certain parts of that are wrong, unfortunately.

Of course, we do not believe as the RC's do, since we reject that particular explanation of the Real Presence, transubstantiation. However, the meaning is that we really do receive the real body and blood of Christ, just that the presence is not a carnal, literal one. It is a spiritual presence that is real, unlike those who believe the sacrament is only a symbol.

No one actually eats Christ's ear or arm during Communion, and since there are hundreds of thousands of Masses being performed simultaneously on any given Sunday morning, it should be apparent to even RCs that they are not taking the meaning of the Real Presence strictly literally, even if they say they do.

 

[beamishboy]

Indeed, but my point still remains. They believe themselves (as do Lutherans) to recieve the body and blood of Jesus, not in a memorialist way even thought they do not explain the physics of it in terms of transubstantiation. Believe me I know at least from a Lutheran standpoint, Christ body is actually "in with and under" the bread and wine.

My point was simply that the original post assumed that all protestants held this spiritualist/memoralist view of the Eucharist which is false.

Yes, you are right about the Lutherans but not really the Anglicans. The Lutherans believe in consubstantiation. I think it means the body is within the wafer and the blood is within the wine, whatever that means.

 

[Albion]

Indeed, but my point still remains. They believe themselves (as do Lutherans) to recieve the body and blood of Jesus, not in a memorialist way even thought they do not explain the physics of it in terms of transubstantiation.

That's correct.

My point was simply that the original post assumed that all protestants held this spiritualist/memoralist view of the Eucharist which is false.

Exactly so...and important for you to have pointed out. Since 1/3 or so of all Protestants are Lutherans and you can add 100 million Anglicans to that total, it is probable that only a MINORITY of Protestants are memorialists.

However (and with a nod to Beamish Boy) the standard Anglican position is that we do not receive the literal, physical body and blood of Christ (whether or not the bread and wine remain--the Lutheran complaint against the RCs) but that we receive his real body and blood only in a transcendent, mystical or "heavenly" way.

 

[beamishboy]

That's correct.



Exactly so...and important for you to have pointed out. Since 1/3 or so of all Protestants are Lutherans and you can add 100 million Anglicans to that total, it is probable that only a MINORITY of Protestants are memorialists.

However (and with a nod to Beamish Boy) the standard Anglican position is that we do not receive the literal, physical body and blood of Christ (whether or not the bread and wine remain--the Lutheran complaint against the RCs) but that we receive his real body and blood only in a transcendent, mystical or "heavenly" way.

I don't get it. We say we partake of the Body of Christ in a spiritual way. The RCs partake of it in a physical way. There's no doubt about this. I have spoken to an RC priest about this. To them the host really transforms into the very body of Jesus and this is done over and over again in a billion different RC churches.

We reject that as erroneous and a superstition. We say we partake of the Body in a spiritual way. How are we different from other Protestants? I'm sure they all agree with us, don't they? They can't possibly agree with the RCs???

 

[Albion]

I don't get it. We say we partake of the Body of Christ in a spiritual way.

What that means is that Christ is present in a real, but spiritual way, as opposed to being present there in the flesh he wore on Earth. "Spiritual" here does not mean symbolic; with that we all agree. However, it also does not mean mentally or emotionally present only--here with us in spirit, etc. It's a real presence of Christ, all right, but in a way that is not of our comprehension using our faculties as we normally do in, for example, assessing the make-up of material in a laboratory or empirical manner.

The RCs partake of it in a physical way. There's no doubt about this.

Right.

I have spoken to an RC priest about this. To them the host really transforms into the very body of Jesus and this is done over and over again in a billion different RC churches.

That's what they say, all right. This could be so only if Christ's literal body were infinitely expandable, but then how can it be his actual body?

We reject that as erroneous and a superstition. We say we partake of the Body in a spiritual way. How are we different from other Protestants?

Those other Protestants (but not the Lutherans, as our friend wanted to point out) believe it only represents Christ's body or symbolizes it. We believe it is his real body, but how that can be is something that is above our human powers of comprehension and observation to understand fully.

I'm sure they all agree with us, don't they?

No, they don't. But they may agree with us that the Catholic and Lutheran views are wrong for taking the body and blood too literally.

 

[Celticflower]

I love a line from the Methodist service which says to "feast upon Him in your heart with thanksgiving".

 

[Albion]

I love a line from the Methodist service which says to "feast upon Him in your heart with thanksgiving".

Then you'd probably love the rest of the (Anglican) Book of Common Prayer, too. Have you ever had a chance to read it? It's not called the second most beautiful book in the English language (after the KJV) for nothing and has inspired generations of Christians of all denominations.

 

[Celticflower]

Then you'd probably love the rest of the (Anglican) Book of Common Prayer, too. Have you ever had a chance to read it? It's not called the second most beautiful book in the English language (after the KJV) for nothing and has inspired generations of Christians of all denominations.

I haven't read it (except bits and pieces), but would love to add it to my library.

 

[Albion]

I haven't read it (except bits and pieces), but would love to add it to my library.

I know you know the history of Methodism, so it's nothing unusual for the similarities to exist in our respective worship services, however, you'll be interested to see for yourself how much similarity there is.

If you do pick up a copy--and possibly the library will have one--get the 1928 edition. The 1979 edition that The Episcopal Church uses these days (but not the other Anglican churches in the US) is a modern language version in which much of this beautiful language has been altered. You might also find a copy of the 1928 at a used book sale; I have picked up a few myself this way and passed them along to friends. And Amazon also sells them, as I recall.

 

[Celticflower]

Thanks for the tip Albion!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Verses that Protestants can't Accept


Protestants must ignore or distort much of the bible because it supports Catholicism.

That is a new one on me but if that is what your view is, then you are of course welcome to it. Anyway this is a very interesting thread concerning the "Bread from Heaven"

John 6:51 `I am the Bread, the Living, the out of the heaven descending; if-ever any-one may be eating out of this, the bread, he shall be living into the age; and the bread yet which I shall be giving the flesh of Me is for sake of the world, Life.

 

[calluna]

John 6 shows that Jesus must have speaking metaphorically regarding bread and blood, because the event it portrays took place before the Last Supper, when his disciples can have had only two possibilities to consider. These were metaphorical meaning (which frightened most away), and literal cannibalistic eating of Jesus, which was absurd.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Your a trip bro..It also supports the defective orthodox..

I would love to hear that explanation.

 

[Simonline]

Post deleted

 

[Simonline]

Post deleted