Do you do this?

[epostle1]

.......

Marymog,

I have to disagree with you on your position. First, for clarification, I don't think the Romans comment should be taken to mean the early Christians "literally" thought they were eating Jesus' body. I mean, after all, the Romans also accused the Christians of being "atheists" since they didn't worship idols. Clearly these were claims meant to discredit these believers and should not be interpreted as accurate reflections of their beliefs.

The pagan Romans wrongly misunderstood the eating of Christ's body and blood as eating people, which is cannibalism. The error on the part of the pagan Romans shows the early Church took transubstantiation seriously.

Second, the NT clearly points out (as does Jesus, himself) that this is to be done "in remembrance." I don't read anywhere that this is done for salvation or to ingest Christ's eternal life.

Jesus said it FOUR times.

The Catholic position on this is derived much more from Aristotle than the NT Scriptures (in my opinion).

The Catholic position is not derived from Aristotle.
First, it's 'philosophy', not 'pagan beliefs'. In antiquity, Aristotle and other philosophers observed, reasoned, and debated on a number of notions in the physical world. Aristotle's thought led him to a way to describe what a thing 'is'. He developed 'categories' to explain and describe things. His notions were picked up by Aquinas, who used the notions of 'substance' and 'accidents' to help describe what happens in the Eucharist. If a non-Christian scientist came up with an explanation of why something happens in the world, would she reject the explanation just because it came from a non-Christian? If so, she better stop using algebra -- it came from Muslims. ;)
Substance is what you see, accidents is what you don't see.
Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 – Jesus says, this IS my body and blood. Jesus does not say, this is a symbol of my body and blood.

Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19-20 – the Greek phrase is “Touto estin to soma mou.”
1 Cor. 11:24 – the same translation is used by Paul – “touto mou estin to soma.” The statement is “this is really” my body and blood. Nowhere in Scripture does God ever declare something without making it so.

The taking of the Lord's Supper is a regular reminder of Christ's sacrifice and the new covenant to which we belong. I take communion every week, but I do it as a "reminder" of God's grace and not as a means to receive God's grace.

Keep up with the reminders. We do the same thing, but scripture has more.
Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 – the translation of Jesus’ words of consecration is “touto poieite tan eman anamnasin.” Jesus literally said “offer this as my memorial sacrifice.” The word “poiein” (do) refers to offering a sacrifice (see, e.g., Exodus 29:38-39, where God uses the same word – poieseis – regarding the sacrifice of the lambs on the altar). The word “anamnesis” (remembrance) also refers to a sacrifice which is really or actually made present in time by the power of God, as it reminds God of the actual event (see, e.g., Heb. 10:3; Num. 10:10). It is not just a memorial of a past event, but a past event made present in time.

In other words, the “sacrifice” is the “memorial” or “reminder.” If the Eucharist weren’t a sacrifice, Luke would have used the word “mnemosunon” (which is the word used to describe a nonsacrificial memorial. See, for example, Matt. 26:13; Mark 14:9; and especially Acts 10:4). So there are two memorials, one sacrificial (which Jesus instituted), and one non-sacrificial.

Lev. 24:7 – the word “memorial” in Hebrew in the sacrificial sense is “azkarah” which means to actually make present (see Lev. 2:2,9,16;5:12;6:5; Num.5:26 where “azkarah” refers to sacrifices that are currently offered and thus present in time). Jesus’ instruction to offer the bread and wine (which He changed into His body and blood) as a “memorial offering” demonstrates that the offering of His body and blood is made present in time over and over again.

Num. 10:10 – in this verse, “remembrance” refers to a sacrifice, not just a symbolic memorial. So Jesus’ command to offer the memorial “in remembrance” of Him demonstrates that the memorial offering is indeed a sacrifice currently offered. It is a re-presentation of the actual sacrifice made present in time. It is as if the curtain of history is drawn and Calvary is made present to us.
Heb. 13:20-21 – Jesus died once, but His blood of the eternal covenant is eternally offered to equip us (present tense) with everything good that we may do God’s will.

Finally, one of the primary differences between Catholics and many Protestants is the sacramental approach to grace. The Catholic Church teaches that grace comes through the Church and that in order to be saved, one must receive that grace through God's appointed clergy and the appointed means (sacraments, i.e. attending Mass, infant baptism, Eucharist, Confession, etc). Many Protestants turned from this understanding that the hierarchy of the Church holds the keys to God's grace and salvation and believe God's grace comes by faith. This is why Martin Luther emphasized the "solas". Faith alone, Grace alone, Scriptures alone...etc. This does not mean that we ONLY need the Scriptures, but it is to say that we do not need the Scriptures + the official Church interpretation....or Faith + official Church sacraments.

Maybe we are right and maybe not. But the point is, there is a fundamental difference in our understanding of how we receive God's grace. We believe it is by faith, whereas it seems you hold to the position that it comes through the Church. I hope that clarifies things.

Not really. Grace comes from Christ to the Church. There is no bi-pass, nobody has Jesus on speed dial.

 

[ScottA]

You equated the “practice” of marriage to Paul's words about receiving Jesus body and blood. I don’t understand how the two equate?

If you are talking about the CEREMONY that is performed during a wedding then I agree that "practice" (ceremony) is ingrained and handed down from generation to generation. It seems to me you are equating the “Do this in remembrance of me” , the Last Supper ceremony, to a marriage ceremony? If you are, that is a false equivalency and here is why:

Scripture does not tell us how to perform a marriage ceremony.

Scripture does tell us, in The Last Supper narrative, how we are to perform a ceremony in remembrance of Him. He taught us how.

So I would like to get back to the original question of which you didn’t answer. I will word the question using the verbiage you have used:

Do you participate in a "practice" that is in remembrance of Him? If you do, does that "practice" include bread and wine? If you don’t, why don’t you?

IHS...Mary

I was not saying anything so complicated, but rather that "practices" are practice, and they are not the point, but are mere practices of what is, and what we should take away from that they instill.

The "practice" of communion simply symbolizes that we must partake of Christ in the flesh by answering when He knock and dying that as He died, that "it is no longer we who live, but Christ who lives in us." And His blood symbolizes Life, which is the spirit of God, and must be taken on in rebirth from the Holy Spirit. This is what He did in His life and in His death, and if we are to "follow Him", we should "remember" and do likewise.

 

[Marymog]

I was not saying anything so complicated, but rather that "practices" are practice, and they are not the point, but are mere practices of what is, and what we should take away from that they instill.

The "practice" of communion simply symbolizes that we must partake of Christ in the flesh by answering when He knock and dying that as He died, that "it is no longer we who live, but Christ who lives in us." And His blood symbolizes Life, which is the spirit of God, and must be taken on in rebirth from the Holy Spirit. This is what He did in His life and in His death, and if we are to "follow Him", we should "remember" and do likewise.

I will try one more time:

Do you participate in a "practice" that is in remembrance of Him? If you do, does that "practice" include bread and wine? If you don’t, why don’t you?

Mary

 

[bbyrd009]

i notice that it is usually when we stop trying and give up that God can start, fwiw

 

[Helen]

i notice that it is usually when we stop trying and give up that God can start, fwiw

Well said...we do enter into a rest when we cease from our own trying..
Remember years ago the phrase.." Let go and let God"
That says it all.
We don't let go of God..we let go of our own endeavours to 'get it right'.

 

[Helen]

I was not saying anything so complicated, but rather that "practices" are practice, and they are not the point, but are mere practices of what is, and what we should take away from that they instill.

The "practice" of communion simply symbolizes that we must partake of Christ in the flesh by answering when He knock and dying that as He died, that "it is no longer we who live, but Christ who lives in us." And His blood symbolizes Life, which is the spirit of God, and must be taken on in rebirth from the Holy Spirit. This is what He did in His life and in His death, and if we are to "follow Him", we should "remember" and do likewise.

Agree, 'the practice' of anything is not the reality of..it is just a shadow of the True.

 

[Helen]

Not really. Grace comes from Christ to the Church. There is no bi-pass, nobody has Jesus on speed dial.

I DO..

I am always on 'the Phone' with Him chatting.

His phone number is PS 5015
"Call upon Me in the day of trouble; I shall rescue you." :)

 

[Marymog]

Agree, 'the practice' of anything is not the reality of..it is just a shadow of the True.

Hi BG,

Why does scripture tell us to "practice" so many things: anointing the sick with oil in the name of the Lord, confess to each other our sins, consume bread and wine, not to look at a woman with lustful intent, baptism, feed the poor, offer our coat etc. etc.??? I feel like there must be a reason we are asked to DO all these things. We may not know the reasons but He must have a reason.

Can we just decide which ones we want to practice and which ones we don't?

How does Philippians 4:9, Matthew 28:19-20 and John 15:7 fit into all of this?

You and @Wormwood said you practice the reception of communion. Why do you practice it?

IHS....Mary

 

[Helen]

Hi BG,

Why does scripture tell us to "practice" so many things: anointing the sick with oil in the name of the Lord, confess to each other our sins, consume bread and wine, not to look at a woman with lustful intent, baptism, feed the poor, offer our coat etc. etc.??? I feel like there must be a reason we are asked to DO all these things. We may not know the reasons but He must have a reason.

Can we just decide which ones we want to practice and which ones we don't?

How does Philippians 4:9, Matthew 28:19-20 and John 15:7 fit into all of this?

You and @Wormwood said you practice the reception of communion. Why do you practice it?

IHS....Mary

Hi Mary
I would say that you are somewhat hung up on the word "practice" here.

 

[amadeus]

In Luke 22:19 Jesus says to “Do this in remembrance of me”. Later on in Luke 24:30 He did with his disciples what he was asking us to do. When He did it their eyes were opened.

In John 6:53 He tells us Verily, verily if we don’t do it we have no life in us. We all know the power of the words Verily, verily when Jesus proclaims it!

Lest we forget what Paul wrote in 1 Cor. 10:16–17. Paul was taught by the Apostles and he knew when he did what Jesus commanded him to do that he was sharing in the body of Christ. Paul later goes on to say in 1 Corinthians 11:23–29 if you do this in an unworthy manner YOU will be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord further saying all who do this without discerning the body eat and drink judgment against themselves. In Acts 20:7 we find out that Paul and his fellow Christians did what Jesus asked us to do on the first day of the week.

In the Didache (1st century writing) it is written that they did this in remembrance of Him. They taught that no one should do this unless they that have been baptized and they said that what they were sharing/doing was Holy. (Do not give what is holy to the dogs)

Late first and early 2nd century historical Roman writings accuse the Christians of being cannibals because they did this, just like Jesus commanded them to do.

A student of the Apostle John, Ignatius of Antioch, became upset that some of the Christians of his time weren’t doing what Jesus commanded they do. He was taught that by NOT doing this they were denying a gift from God (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 6).

My question is: Do you do this in remembrance of Him? How often? If you don’t then I am curious why you don’t? Do you have any scriptural justification for NOT doing it? Will one not go to heaven if they don’t do it?

IHS....Mary

The "how often" is as often as we are remembering Him. How often should we read the Bible or pray in remembrance? I read and pray daily, but as with eating our natural foods, just once a day is probably not enough. When I am on forums such as this one, I am continuously interrupting my read and typing to pray. That prayer is the drinking of His Blood and really counts as it bring the dead Flesh to Life within us... at least as I understand it.

You're apparently more concerned with the physical partaking of bread [wafer or host] and the drinking of the blood [wine or grape juice]. You'll have to ask someone else about those things as I don't do that anymore.

 

[Marymog]

Hi Mary
I would say that you are somewhat hung up on the word "practice" here.

I guess I could be.

I understand it to mean the act of doing; marriage ceremony, giving your coat to one in need, receiving communion, anointing with oil, gathering with my fellow Christians once a week (just like the Christians in the NT practiced) etc. etc.

Where am I going wrong in my use of the word "practice"?

If you don't "practice" receiving communion, what do you call it? The act of receiving communion?

I am only using the word Scott used and you seem to agree with....

Would you help me understand in what context you are using it?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

The "how often" is as often as we are remembering Him. How often should we read the Bible or pray in remembrance? I read and pray daily, but as with eating our natural foods, just once a day is probably not enough. When I am on forums such as this one, I am continuously interrupting my read and typing to pray. That prayer is the drinking of His Blood and really counts as it bring the dead Flesh to Life within us... at least as I understand it.

You're apparently more concerned with the physical partaking of bread [wafer or host] and the drinking of the blood [wine or grape juice]. You'll have to ask someone else about those things as I don't do that anymore.

Hi Amadeus,

You used to do it. Why did you do it then?

Why don't you do it anymore?

Mary

 

[amadeus]

@Marymog

Marymog said: Hi Amadeus,

Your question is a bit confusing to me so I will answer it the best I can.

I suppose Christians are eating His flesh and drinking His blood.....Just like he told us to do: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.

I suppose those Christians, old men included, do it because He told us Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

I hope that answers your question. BTW....Would you like to TRY to answer the questions I posed in the OP?

IHS...Mary

The old men I mentioned are not just physically old men. The apostle Paul speaks of the old man and the new man here and a couple of other places:

"That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." Eph 4:22-24

He was speaking of the old man of each of us before we met Jesus that constantly wants to lead us back to sin. The new man on the other hand will lead us away from sin and toward God.

 

[Marymog]

I was not saying anything so complicated, but rather that "practices" are practice, and they are not the point, but are mere practices of what is, and what we should take away from that they instill.

The "practice" of communion simply symbolizes that we must partake of Christ in the flesh by answering when He knock and dying that as He died, that "it is no longer we who live, but Christ who lives in us." And His blood symbolizes Life, which is the spirit of God, and must be taken on in rebirth from the Holy Spirit. This is what He did in His life and in His death, and if we are to "follow Him", we should "remember" and do likewise.

I re-read your post and think I understand what you are saying.

You don't think it is necessary to participate in the actual eating of the bread and drinking of the blood. The Last Supper words and actions that Jesus performed are not actions that we need to perform.

The Last Supper was a "symbolic" act of what we are to do and how we are to receive Him into us?

Did I get it right this time? :):):)

Curious Mary

 

[amadeus]

Hi Amadeus,

You used to do it. Why did you do it then?

Why don't you do it anymore?

Mary

For the same reason we don't look for an unblemished wooly type lamb and take him to an altar and kill him there. Those sacrifices were types or shadows of the real and final sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary. The old sacrifices were no longer necessary.

The eating of a piece of unleavened bread and drinking of some wine [or grape juice] was also a type or shadow which Jesus showed us to indicate what we would be doing later. The Holy Ghost was not yet poured out to quicken the Word.

Now since the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross and the out pouring of the Holy Ghost according to Acts chapter 2, we really eat his dead flesh [the Word of God per John 1:14] and it is then quickened (brought to Life) within us by the Holy Ghost within us.

 

[Marymog]

@Marymog


The old men I mentioned are not just physically old men. The apostle Paul speaks of the old man and the new man here and a couple of other places:

"That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." Eph 4:22-24

He was speaking of the old man of each of us before we met Jesus that constantly wants to lead us back to sin. The new man on the other hand will lead us away from sin and toward God.

Dear sir,

I do not see how Eph 4:22-24 has anything to do with the subject matter at hand.

Respectfully, Mary

 

[amadeus]

@Marymog

I used to do it because at the time I thought is was necessary. Now I don't see it as harmful so as long as a person also understands what the real thing is partakes of the real thing.

 

[amadeus]

Dear sir,

I do not see how Eph 4:22-24 has anything to do with the subject matter at hand.

Respectfully, Mary

I was only showing why I used the words, "old men". The old man of us does not really eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus. Only the new man does that.

 

[Marymog]

For the same reason we don't look for an unblemished wooly type lamb and take him to an altar and kill him there. Those sacrifices were types or shadows of the real and final sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary. The old sacrifices were no longer necessary.

The eating of a piece of unleavened bread and drinking of some wine [or grape juice] was also a type or shadow which Jesus showed us to indicate what we would be doing later. The Holy Ghost was not yet poured out to quicken the Word.

Now since the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross and the out pouring of the Holy Ghost according to Acts chapter 2, we really eat his dead flesh [the Word of God per John 1:14] and it is then quickened (brought to Life) within us by the Holy Ghost within us.

I do not understand a word you just wrote...I apologize.

You used to participate in communion and you stopped because____________________. (fill in the blank)

In the last paragraph you wrote are you saying that due to Jesus sacrifice on the cross AND the out pouring of the Holy Ghost that we are now really eating the words of God? The bread He offered at the Last Supper as His flesh is not valid anymore?


Mary

 

[Marymog]

I was only showing why I used the words, "old men". The old man of us does not really eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus. Only the new man does that.

Thank you.

Why doesn't the old man need to participate in communion?

Why is it only the new man that does that?

Curious Mary