Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread,
and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.
A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup.
For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.
1 Cor 11:23-29
Paul is recalling the events of the last supper. Where do you see Paul or any other Apostle transubstantiating the bread and fruit of the vine into the actual body and blood of Jesus?
I don’t question the words of Jesus at the last supper. I understand He meant them spiritually. And I absolutely believe in His “real presence” every time I share His supper. He is right there with me.
However, nowhere in Scripture do we read of an Apostle or anyone transubstantiating. The term is nowhere to be found. In fact, it’s not found in early church history either.
I don’t need to prove anything by scripture that the apostles did . The early church taught what the apostles taught them . You can choose not to believe it, but that changes nothing . All of the descendants of the early churches still teach the same thing as the first bishops and priest were taught by the apostles , the Real Presence of Christ in the bread and wine . The RCC, the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox, all teach it . There is a reason why . It’s because that’s what the apostles taught . Even Martin Luther believed in the Real Presence of Christ . He just changed the word to co substantiation for some reason . In short, EVERY church that can trace its roots directly to the Apostles teach the Real Presence .
Maybe there is some reason for this .
Here is what Ignatius of Antioch had to say in 110 AD. He is regarded as one of the 3 most important Fathers of the immediate church after the apostles .
“Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).
It would be helpful if you explained what the passage I posted means, since you believe I’ve twisted it.
61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? 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. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. 65 And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.”
Paul is recalling the events of the last supper. Where do you see Paul or any other Apostle transubstantiating the bread and fruit of the vine into the actual body and blood of Jesus?
I don’t question the words of Jesus at the last supper. I understand He meant them spiritually. And I absolutely believe in His “real presence” every time I share His supper. He is right there with me.
However, nowhere in Scripture do we read of an Apostle or anyone transubstantiating. The term is nowhere to be found. In fact, it’s not found in early church history either.
Why would we or anybody need an example of 'an Apostle or anyone transubstantiating' when we have in multiple places,
already posted, the teacher Himself, Jesus, giving the teaching, in detail, and the instruction for them to do this?
Paul is recalling the events of the last supper. Where do you see Paul or any other Apostle transubstantiating the bread and fruit of the vine into the actual body and blood of Jesus?
I don’t question the words of Jesus at the last supper. I understand He meant them spiritually. And I absolutely believe in His “real presence” every time I share His supper. He is right there with me.
However, nowhere in Scripture do we read of an Apostle or anyone transubstantiating. The term is nowhere to be found. In fact, it’s not found in early church history either.
Your expectations, premises, and assumptions are all wrong. You're looking at Christianity backwards.
There is no detailed account of a divine liturgy taking place in the New Testament, other than the Last Supper itself. There's no order of the Mass given to us in the New Testament. Why do you expect that we should see "an Apostle or anyone transubstantiating"? We have Jesus breaking the bread and calling it His Body, we have Jesus' followers recognizing Him in the "breaking of the bread", we have Paul reiterating what was handed down to Him. The meaning is clear to anyone who has not been inculcated with anti-Catholic polemics.
Of course the term "transubstantiation" is not found in Scripture. The term wasn't invented until the Middle Ages to describe what the Church had always believed about what happens during the consecration. The term is based on Aristotelian metaphysics.
It would be helpful if you explained what the passage I posted means, since you believe I’ve twisted it.
61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? 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. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. 65 And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.”
Jesus isn’t referring to his flesh, he is referring to the general meaning of flesh as in human effort . He is saying the efforts of humans avail nothing, that it is the Spirit that brings salvation.
What you can’t escape is that the very people who heard him, IN PERSON, give these teachings understood him to mean transsubstantiation. You wish to pretend that you understand what Jesus meant 2000 years later from reading an English translation of a Greek Bible , that itself translated Christ’s Aramaic words into Greek, better than the Apostles who heard Jesus with their own ears, AND continued to follow and learn from him after this moment .
Seems kind of arrogant . But it is what Protestantism is based on . “ We know better than the Apostles”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
?
