Featured Word of Faith and the Denomination

1 Corinthians 11:20-34.

However,
The reason that some of the Corinthians were sick, was not because they were eating and drinking His actual flesh and blood unworthily, but because in the process of remembering such a sacred act as Him giving those things for us, the Corinthians were being disrespectful of it.

" For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the [same] night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24 and when he had given thanks, he brake [it], and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.
27 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.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body." ( 1 Corinthians 11:23-29 )


It is a testament to His body and blood...not the actual elements.

Since flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God ( 1 Corinthians 15:50 ), and the Lord is in Heaven at the right hand of the Father ( Mark 16:19 ), His actual blood is gone, and His body changed ( 1 Corinthians 15:35-54 ).

There are natural bodies and spiritual bodies...Christ was raised up in a spiritual body, not a natural one.
Proof?
The nail prints in His hands and the hole in His side did not bleed ( John 20:24-29 ).

Those that eat and drink of it in an unworthy and insulting manner, do so not being aware of the disrespect that they are having towards the Lord's natural body, which was given for them, as was His blood.

In the final analysis, to teach and believe in "Transubstantiation" is tantamount to taking the Lord Jesus down off His throne in Heaven ( next to His Father ), changing Him back into a mortal man with both flesh and blood ( instead of an immortal man ), and then putting Him back on the cross in that state...and re-sacrificing Him over and over and over ( Hebrews 6:4-6 ) to an open shame.

The "crucifix".


That horrifies me, because He said " it is finished", and some people seem to think that it's not.



This is my final reply to this thread.

 

Excellent.

It is my understanding the believers are the body of Christ being His church.
". . . For we [being] many are one bread, [and] one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.. . ." -- 1 Corinthians 10:17. And the unworthy eating in "fellowship" "communion" is to use it as a common meal.
". . . When ye come together therefore into one place, [this] is not to eat the Lord's supper. For in eating every one taketh before [other] his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise [you] not. . . ." -- 1 Corinthians 11:20-22.

Again 1 Corinthians 10:17". . . For we [being] many are one bread, [and] one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.. . ." As believers are His body here on earth. And as believers are indwelt by Christ (Romans 8:9; 1 John 5:12). By which one actually knows God.

Do you understand my plain reading of the text?

 

There are a number of issues here. At issue is knowing God. I wrote "But the difference between actually knowing God or not." You know God? Why should you be offended?

I had asked ask you:

Did I miss your answers? Did you not judge that I had judge you of not knowing God?

The Apostle wrote: " . . Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. . . ." -- Romans 2:1.

If you where to explain to someone how to actually know God, what would you explain?

Respectfully,
Paul E. Schippnick

 

It would seem we do not agree on this point.
The following is my reply to our friend @Adonia

 

You are a Baptist and I am a Roman Catholic. It's the classic "bait" question that I have received before. Oh I can hear it now, the idea that one cannot know God if one doesn't believe as you believe. I have talked with people of all Christian faith traditions my entire adult life and the idea of asking that question of them has never entered my mind. I assume they know God because they claim the title "Christian". Yes I am offended because you do not show me the same basic respect one Christian to another should naturally do.

You even asking me the question tells me all I needed to know.

I wouldn't. I would simply advise the person to seek God and He will come to them as He would. For some it might be in the way Baptists believe, others Mormons, or even others the Eastern Orthodox tradition. It might not even be in any organized faith tradition setting at all, it could be like some here who have come to know Him on their own. God can come to us wherever we are and it is a level of understanding that is reached between the seeker of truth and the Lord.

 

@rockytopva It is my understanding one receives the immersion of the Holy Spirit when one is saved. And that the lost receive the immersion of fire in the judgement. (Matthew 3:11-12; Revelation 21:7-8).

 

Having eternal life is an important issue. (John 17:3; John 6:47; John 5:12-13; Romans 8:9; 2 Corinthians 13:5)

 

I am of the view point that sanctification precedes hearing the gospel, repentance and faith (2 Thessalonians 2:13-14; John 16:7-9)..

 

Yes, that too. But that does not exclude the physical Church that exists here on earth for the care of the faithful. Look, someone had to call out the heresies that cropped up from time to time, just like some earthly authority had to decide which of the many religious writings that were in circulation in those early days were to be considered as the authentic inspired Canon of the Scriptures. I don't understand how any person cannot see that and can disregard the idea that Jesus wanted a real physical, institutional church here on earth.

As for this "Real Presence" debate, I can only say that when it comes right down to it we believe in the "Real Presence" the same way we believe in the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, or anything else the Scriptures tell us - by faith. We have not seen any of what is related to us in the Bible, yet we believe.

 

Very good passages, no Christian could disagree with any one of them.

 

Believers being the body of Christ is the physical church (1 Corinthians 10:17). Made of of churches. Roman, Corinth, Galatia, Thessolica, etc.

The body of Christ (1 Corinthians 10;17; 1 John 5:12 a). The "Real Presence" as you believe is a point of disagreement.

 

And those "churches" were subject to the central authority, they were not allowed to go their own way and decide things for themselves. The letters to them that make up part of the NT Canon were instructions and reminders telling them where they were going astray and that they had better straighten up and get with the program.

And as time went on however, there became but one universal Christian Church that everyone was a part of and who listened to the Bishops who were leading it. That was also a time in the early centuries where synods and councils were held to deal with the problems of the newly emerging Christian faith. There were no Baptists, no Methodists, no Anglicans, just one Universal Christian Church. This historical reality cannot be denied.

 

John 6:53-58 New King James Version (NKJV)
53 Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For My flesh is ]food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me. 58 This is the bread which came down from heaven—not as your fathers ate the manna, and are dead. He who eats this bread will live forever.”

John 6:53-58 Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)
53 So Jesus said to them, “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; 54 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.”


PLEASE EXPLAIN.......

 

Just keep reading...Jesus explains...

John 6:58-64 This is the bread which has come down from heaven. It is not like the food which your fathers had: they took of the manna, and are dead; but he who takes this bread for food will have life for ever.
Jesus said these things in the Synagogue while he was teaching at Capernaum.
Then, hearing this, a number of his disciples said, This is a hard saying; who is able to take in such teaching?
When Jesus became conscious that his disciples were protesting about what he said, he said to them, Does this give you trouble?
What then will you say if you see the Son of man going up to where he was before?
The SPIRIT is the life giver; the flesh is of NO value: the WORDS which I have said to you are SPIRIT and THEY ARE LIFE.
But still some of you have no faith. For it was clear to Jesus from the first who they were who had no faith, and who it was who would be false to him.

 

Re-Sacrificing? You really don't have a clue, do.you?

 

More accurately, to enter into Christ.

Contrary to your assertion in another thread that one may enter into Christ without it, because the "church" teaches it.

 

The door to the court is actually salvation. Offerings for sin were not burned on the brazen altar. The Burnt, Meat and Peace offerings which are our "reasonable service," our "living sacrifices" of Christian service were the only offerings burned on the altar.

So, right from the outset, your Word of Faith doctrine departs from the Scriptures. I recommend you go back to the milk of the word and cut your teeth on those things which be the first principles of the Docrines of Christ.

The Holy Place is the Christian's fellowship with Christ. The bread is Christ. The lampstand is Christ. The altar of incense is Christ. The veil is Christ—His body actually ( Hebrews 10:20 )

The Holy of Holies is the Christian's place in Heaven in Christ in the presence of God.