The text above in RED from Paul's 1st Letter to the Corinthians seems a bit harsh for something that is merely a "symbol" - don't you think?
1 Corinthians 11:23-29
The Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, 'This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.' In the same way also the cup 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 this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
For anyone who eats or drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment upon himself."
So if you do this for more than in remembrance of Him which is what Catholic Church does, then that is profaning the body & blood of the Lord and doing so in an unworthy manner.
The plain fact of the matter is that the Real Presence is something that was taught and believed in from the very beginning of the Church. ALL of the Early Church Father UNANIMOUSLY believed in and taught this truth. There was not ONE single exception in the Early Church. In fact - the first time we read about people rejecting this truth is AFTER the Protestant Revolt in the 16th century. WHY is that??
Not in the N.T. , it doesn't teach that. Indeed, any one confessing to Jesus being here or there, we are not to believe it. In according to the examination of our faith, Jesus Christ is in us 2 Corinthians 13:5; therefore there is no point in receiving Him again by way of communion, indeed, we are warned against such thinking;
2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.
The Catholic Church is supposed to have a final say on all scripture but they can never address how some scripture opposes what they actually teach apart from scripture. Needless to say, when what they teach does not line up with scripture, then obviously, they are misapplying as well as misreading the scripture in teaching what they do about communion being more than just doing it in remembrance of Him.
Why don't we read about these Protestant objections for 1600 years??
A little leaven leavens a whole lump. Protestant fail to recognize that there is no scriptural support for worshipping the Holy Spirit with the Father & the Son as introduced in the modified Nicene creed when scriptures cites how God the Father wants us to honor Him by, by only honoring the Son ( John 5:22-23 ) as that is where the glory of God rests upon John 13:31-32 as God can only be glorified by exalting His Son in worship ( Philippians 2:5-13 )
did the Romans accuse the Early Christians of "cannibalism"??
Cannot speak to their point of view. Maybe they came across some early believers ( pre Catholics ) that made up Catholicism in what it is today? Did you know that the founder of Islam came across a christian cult devoted to Mary and they believed that Mary was part of the Trinity, leaving out the Holy Spirit?
Why did men like Ignatius of Antioch, who was a student of the Apostle John write that the Eucharist was the SAME flesh and blood that died for our sins and was raised from the dead (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1 [A.D. 110]??
Being a student of apostle John cannot be confirmed when John has not confirmed him at all. Indeed, by all points of Ignatius's writings, he had to have been flunked by the apostle John because John's writings do not supper Ignatius's writings at all.
In the Bread of Life Discourse in John 6 - Jesus explains that we must EAT His flesh and DRINK His blood.
Interestingly enough - the Greek word used here for "eat" is NOT the usual word for human eating (Phagon). No - the word used here describes the way an animal rips apart his food (Trogon). This is hyperbole used to drive home an important point.
IF you are going to apply John 6th chapter as being about communion and not about how we are saved, then how do you apply John 6:35 when He promised that once we come to & believed in Him, we would never hunger nor thirst? To apply John 6th chapter to be about communion, then you need only eat and drink communion once, otherwise, every time you take it, you are denying the promise that you would never hunger nor thirst for it again. Since His words are not contradictory, then John 6th chapter is not about communion, but about salvation in how one receives the bread of life, by coming to and believing in Him. Jesus said that but the Jews did not hear Him nor did many of His disciples, but of the 11 of the 12, did believe.
After most of the crowd leaves Him in John 6:66 - WHY didn't He explain to the Apostles in John 6:67 that He was just speaking "figuratively"?? Instead, He turns to them and asks "Do you ALSO want to leave?"
In Mark 4:33-34, we read:
With many similar parables Jesus spoke the word to them, as much as they could understand. He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.
Tell me - WHY didn't Jesus tell the Apostles that He was only speaking "figuratively" in John 6 if the passage above says He explained "EVERYTHING" to His inner circle??
I eagerly await your well-researched response.
So.. why didn't Jesus say to the remaining twelve, "Then why are you not eating my body and drinking my blood? Get to it if you really believe my words!"
I understand Jesus was using hyperbole since He was not really saying for them to eat Him nor drink His blood, seeing how they did not do what He said if that is what you are claiming.
John 6th chapter is about salvation; not about communion in how one receives the bread of life ( salvation ) by coming to & believing in Him.
John 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work? 31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. 34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. 35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. 36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
They were not believing in Him in how to receive that bread of life. Their minds were stuck in eating manna as their fathers did.
Jesus clarified again that it was not about eating.
John 6:57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.58 This is that bread which came down from heaven:
not as your fathers did eat manna,
and are dead:
he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
So eating that bread, they live forever; not by eating it again and again and again, but by coming to and believing in Him
I cannot convince you at all. No amount of research or study will reveal the truth in His words when it is all on Him. When you do see the truth in His words, be sure to thank Him. I didn't do it.
.
