Eucharistic Divinity

[Cathode]

Jesus did not say the bread is His body, and the wine is His blood, only when some priest performed a ritual to transform them. There is also no biblical support for worshiping the communion bread and wine, or calling them Jesus.

You don’t understand brother. The Eucharist is truly Jesus.

I can’t unexperience what I have experienced.

I experienced it and then later read Jesus words in Scripture. I knew already.
“ Personal relationship “ doesn’t even begin to describe Eucharistic Communion with Jesus.

I would laugh if it wasn’t so serious. The whole world is utterly pig ignorant of Jesus in The Eucharist.

You have obviously never read any Puritan literature, or Horatius Bonar, or even the devotional work of Wesley. It is very erroneous and arrogant to think that you can only have that kind of devotion if you have the Roman Catholic view of the Eucharist. I am not knocking what you have experienced. It serves to support my personal view that many individual Catholics are fellow Christians, even though their theological system officially curses me.

It doesn’t curse you. The anathemas pronounced long ago were on those that were the original heretics not the victims of those heretics, the seperated brethren.

The Church viewed the separated brethren as a field of mission. Those deceived.

I talk about spiritual realities from experience, not just as something I’ve been told or read.
There is so much ignorance among believers and I can’t walk by and ignore that myself.

I have been given experiences many have not. It’s a huge privilege but also a huge obligation.
I am answerable, but I am not an Apostolic shepherd, I’m just an indignant sheep.

Things I can tell you are real and true.

The Eucharist is Jesus.

Baptism is regeneration.

Purgatory is real.

Angels are real and they visibly come to help.

Confession and absolution is real.

Anointing of the sick is real.

Miracles are real and the gifts are real.

These are the things I know, not just believe.

I don’t have an excuse not to believe these things, because I know these things.

 

[Ascetic X]

You don’t understand brother. The Eucharist is truly Jesus.

I can’t unexperience what I have experienced.

I experienced it and then later read Jesus words in Scripture. I knew already.
“ Personal relationship “ doesn’t even begin to describe Eucharistic Communion with Jesus.

I would laugh if it wasn’t so serious. The whole world is utterly pig ignorant of Jesus in The Eucharist.



It doesn’t curse you. The anathemas pronounced long ago were on those that were the original heretics not the victims of those heretics, the seperated brethren.

The Church viewed the separated brethren as a field of mission. Those deceived.

I talk about spiritual realities from experience, not just as something I’ve been told or read.
There is so much ignorance among believers and I can’t walk by and ignore that myself.

I have been given experiences many have not. It’s a huge privilege but also a huge obligation.
I am answerable, but I am not an Apostolic shepherd, I’m just an indignant sheep.

Things I can tell you are real and true.

The Eucharist is Jesus.

Baptism is regeneration.

Purgatory is real.

Angels are real and they visibly come to help.

Confession and absolution is real.

Anointing of the sick is real.

Miracles are real and the gifts are real.

These are the things I know, not just believe.

I don’t have an excuse not to believe these things, because I know these things.

You constantly appeal to your experience and feelings, instead of scriptures.

 

[Walter]

Hi Martin: been a while you and I talked. You mentioned the Lollards. Certainly the challenge to the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist has an unbroken history throughout the Christian Church before them? A group or groups of Baptistic Christian's that would be recognized as very close to be doctrinally like the church in which you worship?

I have read church historians (Evangelical) who write that none of the small sects of dissenting Christian's believed as present day Baptists. And, that the first significant challenges to Christ's Real Presence didn't occur for at least 1,000 years after the establishment of the Church. Isn't a bit late in the Churches history to be developing major Christian doctrine? Especially, as you say, the doctrine for the first 1,000 year's is 'idolatry'?

One, Holy, BAPTIST, and Apostolic Church??

Some representatives of the Southern Baptist Convention announced that they're going to push for the SBC to officially adopt the Nicene Creed. Creedsare necessary but can Baptists actually affirm the Nicene Creed in good faith? Joe Heschmeyer addresses this question and more in today's episode...

www.catholic.com

 

[Cathode]

John 6:56. Read the whole chapter, carefully. The whole chapter is about the problem of looking at all this as literal food instead of what Jesus said in verse 29. "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him who He sent". In verse 35 Jesus said "I am the bread of life...." and then goes on in verse 36 to state what the real problem was. "But I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe". I don't see how you guys can really read the whole chapter and then turn around and make it all about literal food. In verse 63 Jesus explains that " The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life".

Yes Dave, Jesus words are Spirit and Life, but it does not say they are symbolic.

“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 it was that would betray Him”

Judas set out betray Jesus the moment he ate the Eucharist in unbelief.

Jesus flesh is real food and blood is real drink.

“ yet one of you is a devil “

The Eucharist is Jesus.

 

[Cathode]

You constantly appeal to your experience and feelings, instead of scriptures.

I have experienced what is written in the Scriptures.

Jesus flesh is real food and blood is real drink.

The reality of this has to be experienced, it is not a joke.

I can”t explain the reality of this. I can only tell you to believe Jesus because He said it.

Heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus words will never pass away.

 

[Ascetic X]

I have experienced what is written in the Scriptures.

Jesus flesh is real food and blood is real drink.

The reality of this has to be experienced, it is not a joke.

I can”t explain the reality of this. I can only tell you to believe Jesus because He said it.

Heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus words will never pass away.

But once again, you not only cannot explain things, you also do not base your assertions on scriptures, but on experiences and feelings. You are on a Baptist forum. You should understand that Baptists base doctrines on scriptures, not emotions.

I am sympathetic to your zeal and to many teachings of the Catholic and Orthodox churches. But certain dogmas have been rejected by Baptists throughout history.

Jesus did not say that the bread is His body, and the wine is His blood, only when some priest performs a special ritual to transform them. There is also no biblical support for worshiping the communion bread and wine, for saying that in the Eucharist we have Jesus sacrificing Himself again, or for calling the bread and wine Jesus.

 

[Cathode]

But once again, you not only cannot explain things, you also do not base your assertions on scriptures, but on experiences and feelings. You are on a Baptist forum. You should understand that Baptists base doctrines on scriptures, not emotions.

I am sympathetic to your zeal and to many teachings of the Catholic and Orthodox churches. But certain dogmas have been rejected by Baptists throughout history.

Jesus did not say that the bread is His body, and the wine is His blood, only when some priest performs a special ritual to transform them. There is also no biblical support for worshiping the communion bread and wine, for saying that in the Eucharist we have Jesus sacrificing Himself again, or for calling the bread and wine Jesus.

Feelings and emotions are tertiary, what’s Primary is the reality of experience.
A witness has greater authority than someone who heard or read something.

If you say you believe scripture then believe Jesus words.

Peter had to make a supernatural act of Faith in Jesus words.

“ You have the WORDS of everlasting life “

Peter didn’t rationalise Jesus words, he believed in Faith, not in human understanding.

Human understanding profits nothing where only Faith can pass.

Jesus knew who didn’t believe.

What didn’t they believe?

They didn’t believe Jesus flesh was real food and blood was real drink.

They did not believe in eating Jesus flesh and drinking His blood into resurrection and eternal life.

 

[JesusFan]

But once again, you not only cannot explain things, you also do not base your assertions on scriptures, but on experiences and feelings. You are on a Baptist forum. You should understand that Baptists base doctrines on scriptures, not emotions.

I am sympathetic to your zeal and to many teachings of the Catholic and Orthodox churches. But certain dogmas have been rejected by Baptists throughout history.

Jesus did not say that the bread is His body, and the wine is His blood, only when some priest performs a special ritual to transform them. There is also no biblical support for worshiping the communion bread and wine, for saying that in the Eucharist we have Jesus sacrificing Himself again, or for calling the bread and wine Jesus.

Rome stated Jesus Last Supper was first Eucharist, so did He canablize Himself for His Apostles?

 

[Walter]

Rome stated Jesus Last Supper was first Eucharist, so did He canablize Himself for His Apostles?

Nope!
This act is not considered cannibalism because it is a supernatural, unbloody action (substance changed, accidents of bread/wine remain) rather than the physical, violent consumption of human flesh.

 

[JesusFan]

Nope!
This act is not considered cannibalism because it is a supernatural, unbloody action (substance changed, accidents of bread/wine remain) rather than the physical, violent consumption of human flesh.

Where did the body and blood that Jesus served at the so called last supper come from then?

 

[Walter]

Rome stated Jesus Last Supper was first Eucharist, so did He canablize Himself for His Apostles?

BTW, not just Rome, Anglicans, Orthodox, Presbyterians,, Methodists, etc., etc., state Jesus Last Supper was the first Eucharist.

 

[Walter]

Where did the body and blood that Jesus served at the so called last supper come from then?

Wow! How big is your God? Again, it is a SUPERNATURAL, unbloody action. Do you really keep God in such a little box?

 

[DaveXR650]

It doesn’t curse you. The anathemas pronounced long ago were on those that were the original heretics not the victims of those heretics, the seperated brethren.

The Church viewed the separated brethren as a field of mission. Those deceived.

If you don't mind, where is that written? I have read it also years ago and cannot remember where I read it.

Regarding the presence of Christ in the bread, when you look at what the Lutherans say, and the Presbyterians and Reformed, and then the Baptists, there are subtle differences in each, which makes sense. That is because the nature of a ceremony requires some level of a conceptual belief - otherwise there could be no ceremony. We are careful to say, "this represents Christ's body" as the bread is handed out but for it to truly represent Christ's body there has to be some concept of that being so. That different individual minds will conceive of that differently I have no problem with.

But there is an obvious level of worship of the bread that most Protestants find disconcerting, and the focus tends to move from Christ to the bread itself, with the explanation that this is fine since the bread really is Christ. We don't think that is fine, and that is the difference. We would be concerned even if the bread was actually Christ - with the object of adoration shifted from Christ to a piece of bread it is still problematic to us. Especially since scripture we use, and tradition at the earliest levels doesn't seem to support any of this. I hope that helps.

 

[Cathode]

If you don't mind, where is that written? I have read it also years ago and cannot remember where I read it.

Regarding the presence of Christ in the bread, when you look at what the Lutherans say, and the Presbyterians and Reformed, and then the Baptists, there are subtle differences in each, which makes sense. That is because the nature of a ceremony requires some level of a conceptual belief - otherwise there could be no ceremony. We are careful to say, "this represents Christ's body" as the bread is handed out but for it to truly represent Christ's body there has to be some concept of that being so. That different individual minds will conceive of that differently I have no problem with.

But there is an obvious level of worship of the bread that most Protestants find disconcerting, and the focus tends to move from Christ to the bread itself, with the explanation that this is fine since the bread really is Christ. We don't think that is fine, and that is the difference. We would be concerned even if the bread was actually Christ - with the object of adoration shifted from Christ to a piece of bread it is still problematic to us. Especially since scripture we use, and tradition at the earliest levels doesn't seem to support any of this. I hope that helps.

At the words of consecration, the bread is no longer bread but the Body of Christ.
It might appear to our senses in every way to be like bread but it is changed.

Scripture and the Early Fathers and Apostolic Fathers support this.

The whole point of the Eucharist is that it is Communion with Christ Himself not communion with bread.

Normal bread does not have the power of the resurrection and Eternal Life in it. Jesus flesh and blood does.

Protestantism does not have the power to confect the Body and Blood of Christ and even so, that is not their intention in their ceremonies.

The difference between the Eucharist being mere bread and the Body of Christ, is the difference between highest Idolatry and true worship of God Incarnate.

Catholics worship the Eucharist as God with us, we house Him in a Tabernacle, The Holy of Holies of our Church, only reserved for God.

Adoration of the Eucharist takes place, Adoration is Latria, worship reserved for God alone.

So either the Eucharist is just bread, and Catholics are the greatest Idolaters of all time worshipping mere bread, or the Eucharist is Jesus Himself fully present Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity receiving true Worship.

You have no choice but to condemn Catholics as either the worst Idolaters of all time or the truest Christians of all time.
There is no in between.

 

[DaveXR650]

You have no choice but to condemn Catholics as the worst Idolaters of all time or the truest Christians of all time.
There is no in between.

I am reluctant to do so but so be it. As you say. I still don't wish to charge that on the average Catholic layman but as for those who should know better, it is on them. Everyone from John Owen to John MacArthur agree with you on this.

 

[Cathode]

I am reluctant to do so but so be it. As you say. I still don't wish to charge that on the average Catholic layman but as for those who should know better, it is on them. Everyone from John Owen to John MacArthur agree with you on this.

You have no choice Dave. If you think the Eucharist is just bread, then you must condemn Catholics as the worst Idolaters of all time.

Catholics give full scale Latria Worship, kneel, bow, prostrate, burn Incense and Adore The Eucharist, housed in a Tabernacle.

Either it is the sickest and most damnable Idolatry with bread being worshipped or The Eucharist is God with us, Jesus fully present in His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity receiving true worship.

 

[Walter]

Rome stated Jesus Last Supper was first Eucharist, so did He canablize Himself for His Apostles?

JesusFan, I sincerely apologize for my rude, knee jerk response to your question. It was uncalled for. I can do better.

Your concern is a valid one that was also a fairly common accusation the Romans made against the early Christians. There are historical records that indicate early Christians were accused of cannibalism often due to misunderstandings of the Eucharist ("eating" Christ's body/blood). How the Church defends against this charge is by making it clear that the Eucharist is, as Cathode expressed, a sacramental consumption of a living, resurrected body under the appearance of bread and wine, not the physical consumption of dead human flesh.

 

[Cathode]

JesusFan, I sincerely apologize for my rude, knee jerk response to your question. It was uncalled for. I can do better.

Your concern is a valid one that was also a fairly common accusation the Romans made against the early Christians. There are historical records that indicate early Christians were accused of cannibalism often due to misunderstandings of the Eucharist ("eating" Christ's body/blood). How the Church defends against this charge is by making it clear that the Eucharist is, as Cathode expressed, a sacramental consumption of a living, resurrected body under the appearance of bread and wine, not the physical consumption of dead human flesh.

And cannibalism is only eating part of a person, but in the Eucharist we receive the whole Person of Christ in a Covenant exchange of Persons.

“ He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood, abides in me and I in him “

 

[DaveXR650]

You have no choice Dave. If you think the Eucharist is just bread, then you must condemn Catholics as the worst Idolaters of all time.

Catholics give full scale Latria Worship, kneel, bow, prostrate, burn Incense and Adore The Eucharist, housed in a Tabernacle.

Either it is the sickest and most damnable Idolatry with bread being worshipped or The Eucharist is God with us, Jesus fully present in His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity receiving true worship.

I don't want to go that far but I would just suggest that instead of always giving advice and acting as if we are "lesser brothers" you might just listen for one moment. Among Protestants, we are hyper concerned about our universal human (not just Catholic) tendency to idolatry. Tons are written about it and there is even a psychological term for the transference of adoration. Every object we own, every purchase we make, every honor we desire is put to a test as to whether we are approaching idolatry. Our places of worship are deliberately toned down and deliberately made with the idea of function and utility over creating "an atmosphere of worship". We deliberately avoid icons, and often even stained glass, and pictures that we fear may lead to this human tendency right within our churches. Even though we sometimes go too far I think your worship with the signs, motions, and symbolic adorations of actual objects and its focus on pageantry we do find dangerous and excessive and believe it proves our point in this area.

It was for this reason that even the bronze serpent made in Moses day was destroyed. It was a legitimate and important relic and reminder - but had become an object of worship. I believe that even if all your tortured explanations of how the bread and wine becomes Christ but the "accident" of the items do not and so on were true, your adoration of the host is still misplaced. You still have Jesus himself, accessible through prayer and with the help of the Holy Spirit. (Your own prayer - with no intermediary needed.) Anything more, even as an aid in worship is dangerous and wrong. But still I know too many Catholics that I would just want to give caution - not curse them as your Schoolmen did us.

 

[Cathode]

I don't want to go that far but I would just suggest that instead of always giving advice and acting as if we are "lesser brothers" you might just listen for one moment. Among Protestants, we are hyper concerned about our universal human (not just Catholic) tendency to idolatry. Tons are written about it and there is even a psychological term for the transference of adoration. Every object we own, every purchase we make, every honor we desire is put to a test as to whether we are approaching idolatry. Our places of worship are deliberately toned down and deliberately made with the idea of function and utility over creating "an atmosphere of worship". We deliberately avoid icons, and often even stained glass, and pictures that we fear may lead to this human tendency right within our churches. Even though we sometimes go too far I think your worship with the signs, motions, and symbolic adorations of actual objects and its focus on pageantry we do find dangerous and excessive and believe it proves our point in this area.

Do you think perhaps understated adornment in churches is the result of cold Soviet puritan excesses.
Being so fearful of idolatry they don’t even smile lest their faces shatter.

Did any puritan ever read how the Temple was constructed, and how its walls were adorned with vast numbers of graven images.

Were the Israelites aware of God’s prohibition of “ Graven images “. How does this square with the Temple being filled with graven images, in Gods very house.

“ Worship ” to a Catholic is a very particular thing.
Strictly speaking, I don’t see what is happening in Protestant/ Baptist churches as “worship” as we understand it.

For us, the readings aren’t worship or the sermon by the pastor. These take centre stage in Protestant Churches.

In Catholic Churches Jesus takes centre stage in the Holy Eucharist, the total focus of Latria Adoration.

A guy walking around on stage giving his fallible interpretation of scripture and a Ted talk with personal anecdotes, no matter how entertaining does not equal “ Worship “.to us.

I doubt there is any chance of idolatry there, where no “ Worship “ is actually occurring at all.
The only true threat of idolatry is perhaps of the preacher on centre stage. The seat filling rockstar.

Whilst you have done a great job guarding yourselves against Idolatry in church adornments etc, you have also done a superb job in removing all elements of actual “ Worship “, where is the Sacrificial Latria and Adoration.?

It is completely missing.

I have been to a number of these and in leaving it does not impress me as “ Worship “. Jesus is not the centre. A guy walking around preaching is.

I’m not saying those gathered are not Christians or aren’t of goodwill.
But what I see is the absence of Latria, Adoration, “ Worship “ as I understand it. And the Eucharist is missing, the focus of our Adoration, Jesus Himself fully Present.
And to receive Jesus Himself in Communion.
It is like a wedding banquet without the Bridegroom present and no food is served. But the MC told some wonderful stories about the Bridegroom and the band played some old favourites.
It kinda leaves one cold.