Scriptural evidence/support for Real Presence

[racer]

For those of you who hold to a "real presence" belief in regards to communion, upon what do you base that belief?

[WesleyJohn]

.

[ByzantineDixie]

For those of you who hold to a "real presence" belief in regards to communion, upon what do you base that belief?

"This is my body....This is my blood"

It goes to the understanding of "is"... (Ya know, every time this comes up I think of Clinton asking for the word "is" to be defined. The man who at the time was the most powerful political figure in the world thought he was being clever by using this angle. :sick: )

Luther said "ist" ist "ist".

Believing in the "Real Presence" means accepting the Mystery. Sure...it doesn't make sense from a human reasoning perspective but God is the Creator and we are the created. The created does not establish the boundaries for the Creator. God is allowed to do things we do not understand. Its a matter of faith and such a wonderful gift!

Rose

[JVAC]

How many of these threads are we gonna have?

[TwinCrier]

It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth; THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: THE WORDS I SPEAK ARE SPIRIT, and they are life.
In verse 63, Jesus asked the disciples that murmured, "Doth this offend you? It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth (gives life); THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: the words that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT, and they are life." He told them plainly that He was not talking literally. He said, "...the words that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT." He also told them here that the physical flesh profits nothing.

This was an example, like when someone in court tries to explain how an accident happens and they draw a picture saying, 'this line is the road and this red X is my car...." Now we know that the line he drew isn't actually a street, it just represents one. The disciples knew this; they knew Jesus wasn't advocating cannibalism. They knew it was bread.

[Phoebe]

It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth; THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: THE WORDS I SPEAK ARE SPIRIT, and they are life.
In verse 63, Jesus asked the disciples that murmured, "Doth this offend you? It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth (gives life); THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: the words that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT, and they are life." He told them plainly that He was not talking literally. He said, "...the words that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT." He also told them here that the physical flesh profits nothing.

This was an example, like when someone in court tries to explain how an accident happens and they draw a picture saying, 'this line is the road and this red X is my car...." Now we know that the line he drew isn't actually a street, it just represents one. The disciples knew this; they knew Jesus wasn't advocating cannibalism. They knew it was bread.
Which book and chapter from the Bible?

[TwinCrier]

Sorry. :blush:

John 6:61 & 63

[racer]

* WesleyJohn sits and listens, for he has been pre-supposed out of the OP.

Grace and Peace,

WJ (who holds to the Wesleyan Quadrilateral of Scripture, Reason, Tradition, and Experience) (and who likes tulc's trademark) ;)

WJ,

I realize that you may hold to other evidence besides Scripture, however that doesn't exclude you from discussing precisely what in Scripture supports your view and how it supports it. :) I don't want you to feel left out. :holy:

[Bastoune]

Since I can't and won't post here I do suggest you check with those Anglicans and Lutherans and other RP believers about the Aramaic and Greek words used that do not, in a RP-believers' view, support "figurative" interpretation.

[racer]

Since I can't and won't post here

Um . . . :scratch: . . . you just did post here.

I do suggest you check with those Anglicans and Lutherans and other RP believers about the Aramaic and Greek words used that do not, in a RP-believers' view, support "figurative" interpretation.

That's what I'm doing. It's the reason for the thread.

God Bless!!

Lisa

[racer]

Believing in the "Real Presence" means accepting the Mystery.

What mystery? Who defined the Last Supper or communion as a "mystery?"

Sure...it doesn't make sense from a human reasoning perspective but God is the Creator and we are the created.

To me, what doesn't make sense according to human reasoning is how humans came up with this teaching or explanation. If that was truly what God meant or Jesus said, it would make sense because He said.

The created does not establish the boundaries for the Creator.

You are correct. And I don't think any person who does not believe in the Real Presence bases that non-belief on the inability of God to perform such a feat. We all know that He can do anything He wants. However, I think He also possesses the ability to make Himself clearly understood in all instances.

God is allowed to do things we do not understand. Its a matter of faith and such a wonderful gift!

Really??? :eek: I didn't know God was allowed to do anything. I don't think He needs permission . . . . :angel:

[Lotar]

Somebody needs to open the IDD quick! Racer's turning on us! :sorry:

[ByzantineDixie]

What mystery? Who defined the Last Supper or communion as a "mystery?"

I don't have a clue as to who first used the term mystery in connection with the Lord's Supper. It's a term that works for me because in my limited human understanding...I can not fathom how this is done...other than to chalk it up to the power of God. Yea God!!!

To me, what doesn't make sense according to human reasoning is how humans came up with this teaching or explanation. If that was truly what God meant or Jesus said, it would make sense because He said.


You are correct. And I don't think any person who does not believe in the Real Presence bases that non-belief on the inability of God to perform such a feat. We all know that He can do anything He wants. However, I think He also possesses the ability to make Himself clearly understood in all instances.

I don't see the issue here...He has made himself clearly understood. But just as clearly we know He does things that our human minds can not explain. How does touching a garment heal a woman who has the issue of blood? How does a group of 5000 get feed with a few loaves and fishes? How can Christ be really present in the communion elements? Because of the power of God. We are not called to understand these things...we are called to have faith in these things.

Really??? :eek: I didn't know God was allowed to do anything. I don't think He needs permission . . . . :angel:

Ahhh...I really need to be more careful how I use language in these forums...I guess any imprecision is fair game. YIKES! Mea culpa. :sigh:

Rose

[racer]

Somebody needs to open the IDD quick! Racer's turning on us! :sorry:

LOL!!! :D ^_^

Too funny!! I can't stop giggling.

No matter what, I love you guys!! :hug:

[racer]

Ahhh...I really need to be more careful how I use language in these forums...I guess any imprecision is fair game. YIKES! Mea culpa.

You're fine. :hug: Please forgive me. :pray: I sometimes let my dry humor get out of control. I'm sorry. :sorry:

[Terri]

Somebody needs to open the IDD quick! Racer's turning on us! :sorry:
:D

I just hope she can get you all straighted out!! :D I certainly haven't had much success!! :P

[seebs]

I don't recall the exact explanations they gave me when I was a kid, but I believe that, now that I know all the words, it came down to consubstantiation. The pastor would say "this is my body, given for you", and "this is my blood, given for you" when handing out wafers and wine. He never said "this is sort of symbolic, and it's actually just a cookie". I assume this is because my church was fairly literal-minded about the Bible, and figured that if Jesus said "this is My body", that it meant that the thing described was His body. (ELCA Lutheran, if it matters.)

[ByzantineDixie]

You're fine. :hug: Please forgive me. :pray: I sometimes let my dry humor get out of control. I'm sorry. :sorry:

Oh no...no apologies necessary. I do need to work on my forum skills. It is so easy for me to forget that y'all can see my joyful spirit through these written exchanges!!!

In His Grace

Rose

[racer]

Oh no...no apologies necessary. I do need to work on my forum skills. It is so easy for me to forget that y'all can see my joyful spirit through these written exchanges!!!

In His Grace

Rose

If it makes you feel better, Rose, your joyful spirit does show. :pink:

[racer]

:D

I just hope she can get you all straighted out!! I certainly haven't had much success!!

Terri,

I don't think he was funnin'. :sigh: At first I thought he was, but I have since discovered he most likely wasn't. :(

Oh, well . . . . . :cry:

[Terri]

Terri,

I don't think he was funnin'. :sigh: At first I thought he was, but I have since discovered he most likely wasn't. :(

Oh, well . . . . . :cry:
:cry: I'm so sorry racer. :hug: I like to tease, so I just think everyone is teasing.

[Lotar]

Terri,

I don't think he was funnin'. :sigh: At first I thought he was, but I have since discovered he most likely wasn't. :(

Oh, well . . . . . :cry:
I was. I was joking around in the other forum, I wasn't specifically talking about you ;) We all love ya. :hug:

[JVAC]

LOL, boy has this thread gone under some funky mutations ;) .

[TwinCrier]

LOL, boy has this thread gone under some funky mutations ;) .Perhaps it's evolving...:scratch:

[Phoebe]

My Biblical basis is Jesus said "this is my body", and "this is my blood." He didn't announce that a parable was coming up.

Out of faith ,I will take my Lord's word for it.

[InnerPhyre]

He also said His flesh is true food and His blood is true drink. Seems pretty cut and dry.

[raptor13]

Just wanted to point out a few more things:

"Jesus said, ‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" (John 6:51–52).

Note that the Jews took him literally, but they could not believe it. Jesus did not correct them saying, "No...I didnt mean it literally. It's not really my body and blood."

Instead this is what he said:

Jesus said, "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; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–56).

Note the "Truly, truly". In other words, "this is truth, not metaphor".

Also, in Corinthians, Paul writes, "Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself" (1 Cor. 11:27, 29). "

Frankly, I really don't understand why people who take the entire Bible literally, from Genesis to Revelations, refuse to believe Jesus' own words "This is My Body... This is My Blood" to be literal.

[racer]

:cry: I'm so sorry racer. :hug: I like to tease, so I just think everyone is teasing.

Terri,

No sweat, I knew you were teasing. It looks like paranoia is taking me over . . . . . :o

[racer]

I was. I was joking around in the other forum, I wasn't specifically talking about you ;) We all love ya. :hug:

Oh . . . good . . . . I can breath better now. Like I told Terri, looks like I'm getting paranoid.

Just ignore me . . . . :angel:

[racer]

For the rest of you, I'll try to get to the serious replies tomorrow.

God Bless!!

:angel:

[ej]

Hope you don't mind my contribution... I had this discussion with a Baptist friend recently. We discussed it for a bit, and then agreed to.... agree. Kind of.

When he asked me whether I took Jesus' body, or a piece of bread,
I asked him whether he prays at night to God, or to a bedsheet.

Okay, so it's a lame analogy, but it helped us understand each other a little ;)

[Terri]

Terri,

No sweat, I knew you were teasing. It looks like paranoia is taking me over . . . . . :o
Well, just because they haven't gotten you yet doesn't mean they are not out to get you! ;) :D

On the serious question I agree with TwinCrier. Of course this is scriptural support for the belief in the not real presence. ;)

It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth; THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: THE WORDS I SPEAK ARE SPIRIT, and they are life.
In verse 63, Jesus asked the disciples that murmured, "Doth this offend you? It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth (gives life); THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: the words that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT, and they are life." He told them plainly that He was not talking literally. He said, "...the words that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT." He also told them here that the physical flesh profits nothing.

[Lotar]

Hope you don't mind my contribution... I had this discussion with a Baptist friend recently. We discussed it for a bit, and then agreed to.... agree. Kind of.

When he asked me whether I took Jesus' body, or a piece of bread,
I asked him whether he prays at night to God, or to a bedsheet.

Okay, so it's a lame analogy, but it helped us understand each other a little ;)
I think that arguement works better for the Calvinist spiritual presence than real presence.

[ej]

I think that arguement works better for the Calvinist spiritual presence than real presence.
I think the two are closer than we would care to admit

/me runs away for fear of entering into debate with the lovely Lotar ;)

[Lotar]

I think the two are closer than we would care to admit

* ej runs away for fear of entering into debate with the lovely Lotar ;)
I agree, they are pretty close.
So I am lovely now, am I? ;)

*wonders if he likes the idea that he strikes fear into the hearts of those who oppose him :D

[I can eat 50 eggs]

John 6:35-57
1 cor 11:27-30

Historical precident. Since zwingli was the first person to really dispute the real presence, 1500 years after Christ, I'll go with history.

[Metanoia02]

John 6:35-57
1 cor 11:27-30

Historical precident. Since zwingli was the first person to really dispute the real presence, 1500 years after Christ, I'll go with history.
My favorite quote from Martin Luther (and I'm paraphrasing):

I would rather drink blood with the Papists then to drink mere wine with the Zwinglians.

[BBAS 64]

My favorite quote from Martin Luther (and I'm paraphrasing):

I would rather drink blood with the Papists then to drink mere wine with the Zwinglians.
Why couldn't the Zwinglians just tell him it was blood, :confused: Luther might have believed them? Tell them what they need to hear! ^_^

BBAS

[BBAS 64]

John 6:35-57
1 cor 11:27-30

Historical precident. Since zwingli was the first person to really dispute the real presence, 1500 years after Christ, I'll go with history.

I have read only once the works of Chrysostom and Augustine on the Gospel of St. John and I am not so sure I agree with 50 eggs on the assertsion of the exergersis he holds to as being historical by any standard set fourth by these two men. IMHO.

I will of course read the works again as time allows.

Peace to u,

BBAS

[Metanoia02]

Why couldn't the Zwinglians just tell him it was blood, :confused: Luther might have believed them? Tell them what they need to hear! ^_^

BBAS
Luther and Zwingli weren't on what you call "speaking" terms at the time. Asa matter of fact a case could be made that Luther disliked Zwinglians more then Catholics.

[ej]

I need to learn more about the Swiss reformation... slightly embarrassed that I didn't know that, Met :sorry:

[Metanoia02]

I need to learn more about the Swiss reformation... slightly embarrassed that I didn't know that, Met :sorry:To avoid thread drift I may address this in OBOB.

[Terri]

John 6:35-57
1 cor 11:27-30

Historical precident. Since zwingli was the first person to really dispute the real presence, 1500 years after Christ, I'll go with history.
Since I do not believe that you have personally quized every person that existed during the first 1500 years of the church, I do not believe that your statement has any credibility.

Jesus was the first one to question it when He said the flesh counted for nothing.

[TwinCrier]

He also said His flesh is true food and His blood is true drink. Seems pretty cut and dry.He also said He was the shepherd and we are the sheep, so start grazing.

[BBAS 64]

He also said He was the shepherd and we are the sheep, so start grazing.
Good Day, TC,

Hold on on sec please, He is a/an door?:D

BBAS

[TwinCrier]

No, no no, our heart is the door. Jesus is bread. Try to keep up.

[Metanoia02]

Jesus was the first one to question it when He said the flesh counted for nothing.
If His flesh counted for nothing, then the death of that very flesh also counted for nothing. I don't think you want to go there.

[TwinCrier]

It is by the shed blood of Christ we are saved, not His flesh.

[Metanoia02]

It is by the shed blood of Christ we are saved, not His flesh.
On what basis do you differentiate the two?

[BBAS 64]

Blank could be seen as a debate :rolleyes:

BBAS

[ej]

It is by the shed blood of Christ we are saved, not His flesh.
I don't understand what point you're making :scratch:

[BBAS 64]

No, no no, our heart is the door. Jesus is bread. Try to keep up.
Forgive me TC :bow:

Getting old and english some time is tricky.
When does IS mean IS and when doesn't it?

BBAS:P

[TwinCrier]

On what basis do you differentiate the two?Are you saying you don't know the difference between blood and flesh? Or did you just want to know why I believe we are saved by the blood? If it's the latter, I use scripture alone:
Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
1 John 1:7 and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

[ej]

Are you saying you don't know the difference between blood and flesh? Or did you just want to know why I believe we are saved by the blood? If it's the latter, I use scripture alone:
Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
1 John 1:7 and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
So what do you make of the bit where Jesus breaks the bread, gives it to His disciples, and says 'This is my body which will be given up for you' ? :scratch:

[TwinCrier]

Just read the last half of the verse: this do in remembrance of me.

[ej]

Just read the last half of the verse: this do in remembrance of me.
I still don't get what you're trying to prove though.

Are you saying that communion wine is real blood, but that communion bread is merely in remembrance of Jesus giving himself up for us?

[Metanoia02]

Are you saying you don't know the difference between blood and flesh?I know the difference between the two, but why do you differentiate the two when concerning the sacrifice of Christ? Didn't Christ have to die in the flesh to atone for our sins? Or could He have merely just spilled His blood without really dying?



Or did you just want to know why I believe we are saved by the blood? If it's the latter, I use scripture alone:
Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
1 John 1:7 and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
I agree with you on this, but I do not consider His flesh and blood to be separate. In your symbolic understanding of the Lord's Supper do you not celebrate His broken Body (the bread) and His shed blood (the wine) to be of equal significance?

[eldermike]

Stop debating!

[TwinCrier]

I still don't get what you're trying to prove though.

Are you saying that communion wine is real blood, but that communion bread is merely in remembrance of Jesus giving himself up for us?No, I am saying that communion is totally symbolic. Neither the wine nor the bread is Jesus.

[ej]

No, I am saying that communion is totally symbolic. Neither the wine nor the bread is Jesus.
Okay - thanks for contributing your personal interpretation :)

[TwinCrier]

I know the difference between the two, but why do you differentiate the two when concerning the sacrifice of Christ? Didn't Christ have to die in the flesh to atone for our sins? Or could He have merely just spilled His blood without really dying?




I agree with you on this, but I do not consider His flesh and blood to be separate. In your symbolic understanding of the Lord's Supper do you not celebrate His broken Body (the bread) and His shed blood (the wine) to be of equal significance?People bleed to death all the time.

Yes, they are of equal sinificance, but they are both symbolic. To worship or pray to bread and wine is not biblical.

[ej]

:)

[Metanoia02]

Stop debating!
I am not debating. I am asking questions and allowing the respondent to explain thier beliefs. I am not presenting my side of the issue.

[ej]

I am not debating. I am asking questions and allowing the respondent to explain thier beliefs. I am not presenting my side of the issue.

Same here.
Just wanting to clarify that what I see... is actually what is believed, and not merely my presumptive imagination.

[eldermike]

If you will review this thread you will find the answers to the questions asked. If you will review further your claims of not debating will also fall apart.

I am not asking for your definition of debating.
I am using my definition.

[eldermike]

it's been said: symbolic - get over it, move on, or I will warn on the next post.

[ej]

I have another question, which I will ask, and as per my previous posts, I will not enter into debate, but accept the answer to my question.


Do Protestants believe that God is REALLY present in church and their homes, or do they pray to Him symbolically?

If He is REALLY present in curch, then why is he not present in the communion bread and wine?

Thanks.

[ej]

it's been said: symbolic - get over it, move on, or I will warn on the next post.

Just as an aside - personally I like to know reasons, as opposed to just one-word answers. I think maybe that's why the discussion carried on.

[Bastoune]

To worship or pray to bread and wine is not biblical.
You are absolutely right. But Catholics do not do this.

One question (not to debate): how do protestants view Jesus Christ's role as "a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek"? How do you interpret that Scripture?

[eldermike]

Warnings follow this post.

[ej]

Okay, no worries, I'll start a new thread to ask my question :)

[eldermike]

I said, move on, i will not allow people to have this thread closed by ignoring me

[eldermike]

every post by a non PRE in this thread will recieve a warning

[eldermike]

three of them will get you banned

[Bulldog]

Do Protestants believe that God is REALLY present in church and their homes, or do they pray to Him symbolically?

Of course we beleive in praying to God.

If He is REALLY present in curch, then why is he not present in the communion bread and wine?

Well, He REALLY is present in the church. I don't dispute you there. But we believe Jesus spoke symbolically when speaking of communion.