Eucharist Not In The Bible

[Norseman82]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1081255' date='Oct 1 2006, 09:29 PM']
Again, if you are going to take John 6 literally then you are stuck with verse 54 which would say that anyone who has taken communion has eternal life. [/quote]

[color="#33CC00"]In the nourishing sense, yes. Let me give you an analogy. Once you are born, you need to eat nourishment to sustain you; otherwise, you starve to death. So also, once you are born [i]again[/i], your soul needs nourishment.

Simple enough?[/color]

[Winchester]

"Do this in rememberance of me."

I'm not sure how doing something to remember someone means you only act symbolically. I thought it meant "do this..." in other words, you do what that person was doing at the time that person said it.

For intance:
I light a torch and throw it off a cliff, telling you to "Do this in rememberance of me."

Does that mean you later pretend to throw a torch?

[dUSt]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1081233' date='Oct 1 2006, 08:08 PM']
No, you cannot use John 6. If you take John 6 literally everyone who takes communion according to verse 55 above has eternal life.

Do you believe that everyone who takes communion has eternal life?
[/quote]
Yes.

In order to recieve communion, you must be in a state of grace. Therefore, those that recieve commuinion have eternal life.

But, unlike what you believe, the Bible and the Church teach us that we can fall out of that state of grace by our own will and choose to reject that eternal life.

So. Next argument?

[cosiegirl]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1081575' date='Oct 2 2006, 12:07 AM']
"Do this in rememberance of me."

I'm not sure how doing something to remember someone means you only act symbolically. I thought it meant "do this..." in other words, you do what that person was doing at the time that person said it.

For intance:
I light a torch and throw it off a cliff, telling you to "Do this in rememberance of me."

Does that mean you later pretend to throw a torch?
[/quote]

Yes, and we "do it" the way Christ did. He broke bread and drank wine at a Supper along with his disciples. That is what we do.

Where is the transubstantiation parting occuring in those verses? Where is it ever talked about? It's not there.

[quote name='dUSt' post='1081656' date='Oct 2 2006, 12:57 AM']
Yes.

In order to recieve communion, you must be in a state of grace. Therefore, those that recieve commuinion have eternal life.

But, unlike what you believe, the Bible and the Church teach us that we can fall out of that state of grace by our own will and choose to reject that eternal life.

So. Next argument?
[/quote]

Who determines whether you are in a state of grace when you take communion? Anyone could put on some nice clothes, sneak into the local Catholic Church and take communion.

[quote name='T-Bone' post='1081262' date='Oct 1 2006, 08:35 PM']
Then what DOES believing in something mean? That you think it doesn't exist? (Remember, we have to have a literal interpetation, and according to Sola Scriptora, can't use any outside information.)
[/quote]

Where is the literal interpretation that says I must eat Christ's flesh to obtain salvation?

"Believing" is defined througout the NT as having faith in Christ. That mean accepting his sacrifice for your sin (knowing that you can not be righteous on your own) and giving your life over to him.

All you have for the literal "eating of flesh" is John 6 which obviously cannot be the correct interpretation because simply taking communion cannot give eternal life as verse 54 says. So "eating his flesh" must be a metaphor for accepting his work on the cross (his body and blood) as payment for your own sin penalty.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1081575' date='Oct 2 2006, 01:07 AM']
"Do this in rememberance of me."

I'm not sure how doing something to remember someone means you only act symbolically. I thought it meant "do this..." in other words, you do what that person was doing at the time that person said it.

For intance:
I light a torch and throw it off a cliff, telling you to "Do this in rememberance of me."

Does that mean you later pretend to throw a torch?
[/quote]
No, Winnie, you toss a match-- the symbol of a torch, duh!


[quote]Yes, and we "do it" the way Christ did. He broke bread and drank wine at a Supper along with his disciples. That is what we do.

Where is the transubstantiation parting occuring in those verses? Where is it ever talked about? It's not there.[/quote]

(I'll try a different Gospel this time)
Luke 22;

19And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."

20In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.


btw, do you really drink wine?

[cosiegirl]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1081388' date='Oct 1 2006, 10:34 PM']
[color="#33CC00"]In the nourishing sense, yes. Let me give you an analogy. Once you are born, you need to eat nourishment to sustain you; otherwise, you starve to death. So also, once you are born [i]again[/i], your soul needs nourishment.

Simple enough?[/color]
[/quote]

That is ay least one of the better analogies I have heard, but it is still wrong.

Yes, when I am born I need physical nourishment. When I am reborn, I need spiritual nourishment which does not come in the form of physical food, but through the Spirit.

Right analogy, wrong application.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1081255' date='Oct 1 2006, 10:29 PM']
Again, if you are going to take John 6 literally then you are stuck with verse 54 which would say that anyone who has taken communion has eternal life. Is it that easy?
[/quote]
Is it as easy as saying a sinner's prayer?

No, it's not that easy. St. Paul says that if we eat and drink unworthily (which he defines as not discerning the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist--meaning those who deny or disregard the Real Presence), we will drink judgment on ourselves. The Eucharist is the font of eternal life, it is necessary for salvation inasmuch as it can be received (those who cannot receive it do not need it, such as infants; their Baptism will suffice). In as much as it is received worthily, it brings grace to the soul. In so much as it is received unworthily, it condemns. Now, salvation does not hinge on reception of the Body and Blood of Christ alone, since a man can simply sin mortally and then not receive, but he too has failed to discern the Body, which, had he recognized it and truly desired it and its salvific effect, he would have received. So it essentially comes down to whether or not you will reject Jesus Christ, since He is made present to us in the Eucharist.

Jesus Christ didn't say "remember me." He said, "do this (turn bread and wine into my true Body and Blood) in rememberence (literally, a "making present" or "re-presenting") of me."

[cosiegirl]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1081760' date='Oct 2 2006, 07:03 AM']
No, Winnie, you toss a match-- the symbol of a torch, duh!
(I'll try a different Gospel this time)
Luke 22;

19And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."

20In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.
btw, do you really drink wine?
[/quote]

Note the "do this in REMEMBRANCE of me".

If transubstatiation is occurring here than at best you would have to say that you need Jesus there to break the bread for you. There is nowhere in scripture where this process (and how to perform it) is outlined.

Do I drink wine? I drink a drink made from grapes the same as wine. Do you drink wine with the same alcohol content of the 1st century wine? The same grapes to make the wine?

Do you use bread?

[homeschoolmom]

Excuse me, Raphael... what is this "sinner's prayer"? I have never run accross that in the Scriptures.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1081773' date='Oct 2 2006, 09:39 AM']
Excuse me, Raphael... what is this "sinner's prayer"? I have never run accross that in the Scriptures.
[/quote]
Really? It's not in there?!

[Akalyte]

Sola Scriptura is not Biblical. Ah Dont ya just love irony.

[cosiegirl]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1081774' date='Oct 2 2006, 07:41 AM']
Really? It's not in there?!

[/quote]

Is cattiness required in this forum?

I am trying to ask legitimate questions here. Attempting to goof on me based on your own Protestant straw men is not winning the arguement.


[quote name='Akalyte' post='1081775' date='Oct 2 2006, 07:42 AM']
Sola Scriptura is not Biblical. Ah Dont ya just love irony.
[/quote]

Does that mean your traditions can be counter-scripture?

[homeschoolmom]

Sorry if we sound catty. We just get tired of the same arguments over and over and over...

btw, welcome to phatmass.

[cosiegirl]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1081770' date='Oct 2 2006, 07:37 AM']

Jesus Christ didn't say "remember me." He said, "do this (turn bread and wine into my true Body and Blood) in rememberence (literally, a "making present" or "re-presenting") of me."
[/quote]

How could he have turned the bread and wine into his body and blood when he was still alive?

The "do this" is breaking bread and remembering.

Jesus was fully human and fully divine at all moments since His conception. If he could call up the dead at the Transfiguration, He could cetainly offer Himself as a "living Sacrafice" to the Father.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1081794' date='Oct 2 2006, 08:00 AM']
How could he have turned the bread and wine into his body and blood when he was still alive?

The "do this" is breaking bread and remembering.
[/quote]
Sola,
I'm a pot-stirrer here, as an ex-catholic, but face the facts. In Scripture, Jesus is saying those exact words during the last supper. I can give you the chapter and verse number if you ask. But let's look at it scientifically.

We have the physics theory that matter and energy are neither created or destroyed. Matter can change into energy and vice-a-versa. As Christians, we believe God created the universe, time, matter, and energy. Makes sensce scientifically since God made the Big Bang fire-cracker and lit it. If God created the universe and has complete power over everthing, what's so hard for Him to change energy to matter and matter to energy in an instant. It only takes His will to do so.

If Jesus is also God, he has the same powers. Also makes sense of how God became man. God can cause His spiritual energy to become electrons and neutrons, etc., and become whatever he wants. Also solves the who virgin conception thing too. Jesus wills his spirit to become matter and look and behave like bread and wine. Jesus' words helps tie everything together symbolically and spiritually. Also note that Jesus was offering his Body and Blood even before the crucifixition, before Jesus was raised from the dead.

Everything seems possible and reasonable now, doesn't it?

[Jaime]

Again (as Soc brought up) take into consideration John 6:51-58.

Here is the perfect opportunity for Christ to clarify himself. Any time he's spoken metaphorically before (and was asked about it) he clarified his position. (Look at the parables)

So Christ had three opportunities to say "Hey guys I'm just speaking metaphorically!" Yet he doesn't. He in fact does the opposite and uses more graphic language. Its clear in this scripture that they were taking him literally. He does this to the point that many people leave.


So we have scriptural evidence that Christ wasn't speaking figuratively. Can you provide scriptural evidence that he was?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1081783' date='Oct 2 2006, 09:49 AM']
Is cattiness required in this forum?

I am trying to ask legitimate questions here. Attempting to goof on me based on your own Protestant straw men is not winning the arguement.
Does that mean your traditions can be counter-scripture?
[/quote]
The cattiness [which I apologize for is because as well] is because we are currently visited by several anti-catholics who engage in straight attack on our beliefs instead of actual conversations.
As to the Eucharist, it means you are using privately interpreted scripture contrary to the first 1600 years of history where the Church has taught and believed that Jesus is present in the Eucharist.
The word rememberance is a lousy translation of what actually happens.
Anamnesis would be the correct term - it means being present at the actual event, so we are present at the timeless sacrifice at Calvery itself. So when we use the inadequate terms "representation" or "remembrance" we are saying it happened only once and we are there. This has been the teaching of the Church since day one " This is my Body, this is my Blood", do this in anamnesis of me. We are there as Salvation occurs.
this is a good link:
[url="http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0402sbs.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0402sbs.asp[/url]

welcome to phatmass

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1081794' date='Oct 2 2006, 10:00 AM']
How could he have turned the bread and wine into his body and blood when he was still alive?

The "do this" is breaking bread and remembering.
[/quote]
How could he multiply the loaves and the fishes?

The "do this" is breaking bread and saying, "This is my Body," in such a way that it becomes His Body. Priests do that in rememberence of Jesus Christ even today.

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1081771' date='Oct 2 2006, 09:38 AM']
Note the "do this in REMEMBRANCE of me".

If transubstatiation is occurring here than at best you would have to say that you need Jesus there to break the bread for you. There is nowhere in scripture where this process (and how to perform it) is outlined.

Do I drink wine? I drink a drink made from grapes the same as wine. Do you drink wine with the same alcohol content of the 1st century wine? The same grapes to make the wine?

Do you use bread?
[/quote]
You think Catholics are more scrupulous about legalistic details than they really are.

As for alcohol content, the ancient world had what were called magistri bibendi, masters of the drinking, who would mix different amounts of water with wine based on their own tastes, so the percent by volume wasn't really all that set in stone.

By the way, Jesus is there, acting in and through the priest, who is in Persona Christi. Now, we know that God's word is such that when He says something is, it is. When Christ says, "this is my Body," and tells the priests to do likewise, He means it quite literally. He says so and it is. The priest, sharing in His ministry, says so and it is.

[XIX]

Welcome to Phatmass, Sola!

In light of the fact that Catholics do believe Transubstantiation happens in the Last Supper, I'll offer a pithy answer to your topical question:

1) It would not bother us if the Eucharist wasn't in the Bible, because the Church predates the Bible. The Church created the Bible. The Church almost invented the Bible. So if you are going to compare the two, then you have to go with the Church. Besides, the Church does back up pretty much everything with Scripture.

2) Sola Scriptura is not in the Bible, but "Christ's Church" is in the Bible, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against Her. If anything, the question becomes whether Catholic Church is the one founded by Christ. As far as I know it's a historical fact that it is founded by Christ.

3) Consubstantiation is not in the Bible. There is nothing in the Bible about using beard as a symbol for Christ. So if you decry the Eucharist on the grounds that it is not in the Bible, then you would also have to give up receiving bread as s symbol.

**Thank you very much for carrying out this debate with Christian charity.

[rkwright]

Welcome Sola!

Its always good to have some actual dialouge between other Christians that is meaningful and not just talking past each other...

There are many other people responding to this thread already so I won't say much, and actually I'm not making any new arguments.

Two people have mentioned already the passage from Cornithians..

[quote]1 Corinthians 11:27-29:
QUOTE
Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.


Pretty strong talk if this is all just symbolism or metaphor![/quote]

This is a pretty good argument that has gone unanswered so far... Sola your comments on this?