Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Uncle Chip
Actually the very verse you quoted shows a bit of a different picture. Allow me to emphasize some different aspects of it:

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."
I'll grant you that the language here is somewhat ambiguous as it does refer to bread. But Paul is also quite clearly connecting this bread with the Body and Blood of the Lord.

I can see how this passage can be thought to support consubstantiation ala the Lutheran understanding, but certainly not a wholesale rejection of the Body and Blood. That's just not supported.

36 posted on 02/21/2008 7:01:00 AM PST by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: Claud; wagglebee
I'll grant you that the language here is somewhat ambiguous as it does refer to bread. But Paul is also quite clearly connecting this bread with the Body and Blood of the Lord.

I believe that what Paul is saying is that if you don't believe the Gospel, then you shouldn't be partaking of the Lord's Supper.

Paul tells you what is really happening when one eats the bread and drinks the cup. He doesn't say that you are eating the body and drinking the blood, but:

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

You are showing the Lord's death until he comes. You are proclaiming half of the Gospel -- the death half. The other half of the Gospel is the resurrection half.

Furthermore, if he is in the bread that you are eating, then he has already come. So what's to show ??? He's clearly not in the bread otherwise Paul could not and would not have written this.

40 posted on 02/21/2008 7:13:32 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

To: Claud; Uncle Chip
I'll grant you that the language here is somewhat ambiguous as it does refer to bread. But Paul is also quite clearly connecting this bread with the Body and Blood of the Lord.

I can see how this passage can be thought to support consubstantiation ala the Lutheran understanding, but certainly not a wholesale rejection of the Body and Blood. That's just not supported.

Very good points. I might add that Paul also demonstrated the importance Christians placed on the Eucharist more than two decades AFTER the Resurrection. They understood that it truly is the Body and Blood of the Lord.

Also, as I mentioned in another thread, in John 6, the Lord makes it clear that the Eucharist is the Bread of Life and how much greater it is than the Manna the Israelites received from Heaven. However, the Manna REALLY DID feed the Israelites, how can a tiny wafer be greater than that unless it is truly the Body of Christ?

There are approximately 2.1 billion Christians in the world, of those there are 1.05 billion Catholics, 240 million Eastern Orthodox, 73 million Anglicans, 70 million Methodists and 64 million Lutherans ALL of whom accept (to varying degrees), the Real Presence in the Eucharist. This means that nearly three quarters of Christians accept what the Lord said, the small minority that rejects the Bread of Life should ask themselves why they are rejecting Him.

45 posted on 02/21/2008 7:32:02 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson