Featured How to Know You are in a Heterodox Cult

Hi! Good morning!

Where in 1 Corinthians 10:16 does it say that Christ Himself is present IN the elements?

 

Jesus says it in the following verses.

1 Cor 11.
23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,
24 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.”
25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.

Mark 14:22-24
22While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take it; this is my body."
23Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank from it. 24"This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many," he said to them.

Matt 26
26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you.
28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins

I think those verses are very clear about what the bread and wine really are.

 

I apologize for the delay, as I have not had much leisure the past couple of days.

1 Cor 10:16 ---> "We have a cup that we bless; is not this cup we bless a participation (communicatio / κοινωνία - koinōnia) in Christ’s blood? Is not the bread we break a participation (participatio) in Christ’s body?"

---> Communion - κοινωνία (koinōnia) means: fellowship, association, community, communion, joint participation, intercourse, intimacy

You can only be having a participation (communion) in Christ's body and blood if His body and blood are present. Otherwise, you would NOT be having a participation in his body and blood.

 

When Jesus likened Himself to a vine, a shepherd or light, did He command anyone to eat said vine, shepherd or light?

Was the eating also metaphorical at the Last Supper?

Jesus explicitly states what the bread is...

John 6:51 ---> "I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world." (DR)

Where does He explain it is simply a metaphor? It's actually quite the opposite. For His flesh is what redeemed man on the cross and it certainly was most profitable.

What the "flesh profits nothing" refers to is rejecting Jesus teaching because they are using their human reasoning, their senses, instead of faith.


"His meaning is, You must hear spiritually what relates to Me, for he who hears carnally is not profited, nor gathers any advantage. It was carnal to question how He came down from heaven, to deem that He was the son of Joseph, to ask, How can he give us His flesh to eat?All this was carnal, when they ought to have understood the matter in a mystical and spiritual sense. But, says some one, how could they understand what the 'eating flesh' might mean? Then it was their duty to wait for the proper time and enquire, and not to abandon Him. That is, they are divine and spiritual, have nothing carnal about them, are not subject to the laws of physical consequence, but are free from any such necessity, are even set above the laws appointed for this world, and have also another and a different meaning. Now as in this passage He said spirit, instead of spiritual, so when He speaks of flesh, He meant not carnal things, but carnally hearing, and alluding at the same time to them, because they ever desired carnal things when they ought to have desired spiritual. For if a man receives them carnally, he profits nothing. What then, is not His flesh, flesh? Most certainly. How then says He, that the flesh profits nothing? He speaks not of His own flesh, (God forbid!) but of those who received His words in a carnal manner. But what is understanding carnally? It is looking merely to what is before our eyes, without imagining anything beyond. This is understanding carnally. But we must not judge thus by sight, but must look into all mysteries with the eyes within. This is seeing spiritually. He that eats not His flesh, and drinks not His blood, has no life in him. How then does the flesh profit nothing, if without it we cannot live? Do you see that the words, the flesh profits nothing, are spoken not of His own flesh, but of carnal hearing?"- St. John Chysostom, Homily 47 on the Gospel of John

Christians believe Christ is sacramentally present in the Eucharist. This is Christianity 101.

Once again, I always find it strange that those who profess to believe that God was present in a box making its way across the wilderness, took the form of a cloud, took the form of a dove, and even became an actual man, entering into His creation as a baby, cannot bring themselves to believe that this same God would be present amongst His people in the Eucharist.

 

There's quite a difference to him using a metaphor like a door or a vine in one of his parables to him using the term "My body" and "My Blood". The former metaphors were a teaching tool that he commonly used, the latter was on the eve of his great sacrifice.

Yes, the teaching that was given to all of Christendom from the very beginning. The Apostles had that belief and passed it down to their successors who took up the mantle of leadership in the newly forming Christian Church.

One which evidently infected all of Christendom until one man named Huldrych Zwingli thought otherwise in the early 16th century.

No! Hopefully the Holy Spirit will at some point enlighten you to the truth of this teaching and lead you away from the false belief that you now have that only was started by one man some 1500 plus years down the line. (He was even dissenting from Luther on this.) You guys can't even get your fake communion right with the unscriptural "grape juice and crackers" as the elements, so don't try to lecture us on what is the truth or not.

 

A beautiful quote from St. John Chrysostom, but you do realize this means little to our friend as they by and large reject the ECF's. John Smyth is their go to guy don't you know!

 

Actually its Jesus Christ!

 

From Lutheran Satire...enjoy...

 

Jesus is God and time is no barrier for God. He is the Alpha and the Omega, so it is not really a big problem for Jesus to be in two places at one time.

 

John 6:51 ---> "I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world."

I suppose those who reject the words of Jesus must think it is just an incredible coincidence that God entered into His creation in a town called Bethlehem, which means "House of Bread", was laid in a manger, which is a feeding troth, and then went on to enter into His passion ushering in the new covenant with these words...

"And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, 'Take, eat; this is my body.' And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, 'Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.'" (Mt. 26:26-28)



The sixth chapter of St. John's Gospel beautifully foreshadows the Eucharist. Yet there is another foreshadowing of the Eucharist that often goes unnoticed: the multiplication of the loves and fishes. This account is recorded in all four Gospels, but St. Matthew's contains the most beautiful Eucharistic imagery. Here is his version:

"So, when he disembarked, he found a great multitude there, and he took pity on them, and healed those who were sick. And now it was evening, and his disciples came to him and said, 'This is a lonely place, and it is past the accustomed hour; give the multitudes leave to go into the villages and buy themselves food there.' But Jesus told them, 'There is no need for them to go away; it is for you to give them food to eat.' They answered, 'We have nothing with us, except five loaves and twoh fishes.' 'Bring them to me here,' he said; then he told the multitudes to sit down on the grass, and when the five loaves and the two fishes were brought to him he looked up to heaven, blessed and broke the loaves, and gave them to his disciples; and the disciples gave them to the multitude. All ate and had enough, and when they picked up what was left of the broken pieces they filled twelve baskets with them; about five thousand men had eaten, not reckoning women and children. As soon as this was done, he prevailed upon his disciples to take ship and cross to the other side before him, leaving him to send the multitudes home." - Matthew 14:14-22

St. Matthew's account foreshadows the Eucharist...

The “great multitude” --> All men

“And now it was evening” --> In the evening, the sun is going down, but the great multitude still has the true light with them

“There is no need for them to go away” --> Christ knows what they truly hunger for

“You give them food to eat” --> Foreshadowing the food these men (the Apostles and their successors) would go on to give the world

“Bring them here to me” --> It is Himself with which Christ will ultimately feed the great multitudes

“Sit down on the grass” --> In the desert we find grass, signifying the season of spring where life is present / the season of Passover

“Five loaves and two fishes” --> 5+2 = 7 = the number of completion

“Looked up to heaven, blessed and broke the loaves” --> The loaves, foreshadows exactly what happens at the start of the Passion at the Last Supper (cf. Matt 26:26)

“And gave them (the loaves) to the disciples; then the disciples gave them to the multitudes” --> the Eucharistic offering / He gives to the disciples and they in turn take it to the multitudes

“All ate and had enough” --> Only Christ Himself can truly satisfy man

“They picked up what was left of the broken pieces they filled twelve baskets” --> The foreshadowing of the superabundance of the Eucharist / Christ Himself satisfies / Prefiguring the reverence to be paid to the Eucharistic bread

“He prevailed upon his disciples to take ship and cross to the other side before him, leaving him to send the multitudes home” --> The disciples enter the ship, the symbol of the Church / Jesus stays with the crowd / The crowd now has Him after eating the bread

This account is relayed in each of the four Gospels. However, in St. Mark's account, immediately after this event, Jesus appears to the disciples who departed (still on the boat) by walking on water to them. The Apostles are frightened, thinking they are witnessing a ghost. St. Mark says something beautiful: They were frightened because "they had not grasped the lesson of the loaves." (cf. Mk 6:52)


It's amazing how many here are frightened of the Truth, because they do not grasp the lesson of the loaves.

 

H e would be in the Incarnation, as he assumed fleshly limitations, so right then was stuck in just HIs physical body!

 

This post demonstrates my assertion that most heresies stem from a lack of understanding of the Incarnation. When God became man, he did not become "stuck in just His physical body!" He did not leave heaven empty, like an empty room, trapping Himself on earth. Nor was God shaved or whittled down to human proportions, stuck in a human body.

Rather, Christ is God who dwelt among us in the flesh. There is a beautiful hymn entitled, Verbum Supernum, and its opening line beautifully captures the mystery of the Incarnation (and the Trinity, which imply one another)...

"Verbum supernum prodiens, nec Patris linquens dexteram..." ---> "The heavenly Word proceeding forth, yet not leaving the Father's side..."

 

Now why should Wycliffe be believed over the Early Fathers of the Church and the other theologians down through the ages who have an opposite viewpoint on this issue? One man over all the others - I don't think so.

 

St. Thomas Aquinas anticipated arguments like Wycliffe's a hundred years prior to Wycliffe and destroys it...

Objection 3. Further, no body can be in several places at the one time. For this does not even belong to an angel; since for the same reason it could be everywhere. But Christ's is a true body, and it is in heave. Consequently, it seems that it is not in very truth in the sacrament of the altar, but only as in a sign.

Reply to Objection 3. Christ's body is not in this sacrament in the same way as a body is in a place, which by its dimensions is commensurate with the place; but in a special manner which is proper to this sacrament. Hence we say that Christ's body is upon many altars, not as in different places, but "sacramentally": and thereby we do not understand that Christ is there only as in a sign, although a sacrament is a kind of sign; but that Christ's body is here after a fashion proper to this sacrament, as stated above.

ST, III, Q.75, A.1


---> Christ remains at the Father’s right hand. He is present to us in the Eucharist not by way of local presence but sacramentally.

The reason for the Eucharist and the reason for the Incarnation are identical. To deny the former is to reject the latter. God is Emmanuel, not Hester Panim.

This is Christianity 101.

 

Now why should Becon be believed over the Early Fathers of the Church and the other theologians down through the ages who have an opposite viewpoint on this issue? One man over all the others - I don't think so.

Becon was nothing more than a hateful, vile, and rabid anti-Catholic person of his day. So much for following the love towards others and the forgiveness that one man called Jesus Christ preached. It is clear that by the posting of such a diatribe, you are in line with Becon instead of Jesus. Sad, so sad.

 

Not only was he a rabid anti-Catholic, he was also a rabid anti-anabaptist! O the irony of a Baptist appealing to someone simply because he was anti-Catholic, without doing their homework to learn he was also anti-Baptist. He called the anabaptists a "most damnable sect", "bloody murderers, both of souls and bodies", "wicked" and "of the devil their father". (The Catechism of Thomas Becon, Of the Sacraments - Baptism)

This is a good example of "When Control-V Paste Jobs from Internet Blogs Go Bad".