|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 4, 2009 9:06:29 GMT -5
I'm not confusing anything. Jesus is no longer flesh and blood. Actually, when Jesus was ressurected, eventually, His physical body was made whole again and He physically became flesh and blood again, so Jesus literally "is" flesh and blood again. |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on Jun 4, 2009 9:07:58 GMT -5
Ok, Steven, nvm  |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 4, 2009 9:08:56 GMT -5
51I 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, which I will give for the life of the world. By reading only this quotation the Lord of the Universe is reduced to a mere loaf of bread. Actually, Jesus Christ (through Whom all things were created) redefines (as He is the Author of creation) what the bread becomes. He doesn't lower Himself to become bread, but elevates the bread to become part of Him. It's the reverse of what some who don't take the entire Bible in context might think. But I definitely agree with you on the dangers of just reading one line and creating an entire belief on it without the influences or context of the lines before or after it. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 4, 2009 9:11:05 GMT -5
So, you are saying that the Lord of the Universe has no humility? I think that the Lord of the Universe hanging naked on a cross is proof that is not true. Besides, you are not looking at the things of God but the things of man. Jesus is not a loaf of bread, He said "This is my body". And you say "No it isn't!" How dare you? You don't have to believe the words of Jesus, but on the day of judgement do you really think that He is going to be displeased with those who believe His words (even if that means appearing foolish to the world) or those who say "you didn't really mean that did you?" I don't understand how some people take everything in the Bible literally except the words of Jesus. I don't think it's their fault, I think they've been taught it so long that they are afraid to believe anything else. Radically following Jesus is scary. If Jesus came to me as a pencil, I would believe it! I would worship that pencil! I would love that pencil! I would bow down to that pencil! So long as it was Jesus! People need to yield their minds to the scriptures, not try to be able to explain or understand them "before" they believe. That is not blind faith. That is conditional faith. Basically only believing in what they can understand. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 4, 2009 9:11:31 GMT -5
Ok, Steven, nvm ;D |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 4, 2009 20:45:35 GMT -5
You guys are worrying me.
I can't remember the name of it, but there was a heretical sect. in the early Church (somewhere in the first 4 centuries) that basically believed all matter is evil, and the only things that are good are purely spiritual. I'm going to look it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 4, 2009 20:55:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Jun 4, 2009 21:04:38 GMT -5
The Diving Eucharist is the Body and blood of Christ. After the invocation of the Holy Spirit, the bread and wine becomes the Body and Blood of Christ, in a unexplained matter, for the sanfication of soul and body.
Jesus Christ taught this to his Holy Disciples. Saint Paul taught the same thing (1 Cor 10:16; 11:18-34). How can ordinary bread and wine cause sickness and death?
"The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?" (1 Cor 10:16).
You do not have to believe Christ and the Holy Apostles. But let the rest of us believe them and confess the Holy Eucharist to be the Most Divine Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Bread and Wine may not look like bread and wine, but I must have faith and believe that it is, because Christ, the Holy Apostles, and the God-Bearing Fathers of the Holy Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church for the past 2,000 years has profess it to be so. Assurance of truth is not based upon our senses.
Christians since the first century have believe this. The Copts and Ethiopians broke communion with Orthodoxy around the mid 400s. The West broke communion with Orthodoxy around 1000 AD. Yet all three maintain the belief that the bread and wine we offer to God in the Liturgy truly become Christ's Body and Blood. It is not till the Protestant Reformation in the 1500s that this ancient belief is denied.
In the history of the Early Church there is absolutely no evidence of any controversy over this issue. That the Gifts offered in the Altar truly become the Body and Blood of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit is never questioned at any regional or ecumenical council. It is not debated hotly by opposing authorities (Bishops, monastics, theologians.) There is no evidence of the strife and dissension that would have accompanied such a drastic change in the Faith, and did accompany every other controversy in the history of the early Church.
As far as John 6.
1) The crowd clearly understood Him literally, and were so horrified at the idea that many of them ceased being His disciples and followed Him no more.
2) The Holy Apostles also took His words literally, judging by Saint Peter's reaction, but knew there was nowhere to run.
3) Jesus did not contradict His initial pronouncement. Only a false understanding of "spiritual" as being "non physical" makes it seem as though He did.
In IC.XC,
Ramon
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Jun 4, 2009 21:08:47 GMT -5
Yup. Actually, according to Saint Ignatius of Antioch, only the Gnostic group abstain from Holy Eucharist because they did not believe, as the Church did, that the Bread and Wine was the Body and blood of Christ ( Epistle to Smyrnaeans,7,1, A.D. 110). They believe so, because like alfie, they did not profess that Christ was truly flesh and blood. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 5, 2009 13:29:51 GMT -5
Even the insane Henry VIII, founder of the Anglican Church (mother of the Presbyterian, Methodist, and many other offshoots) he believed in the sacraments and even after he broke England away from the Catholic Church commanded that the Lord's Supper be kept the same (in theory they believe in the Real Presence)
Martin Luther believed it too. I think the first one to start the gnostic anti-sacramental revival was Calvin?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 5, 2009 13:36:30 GMT -5
The Gnostics...they also believed that God was evil.
Who would want to believe what they believed as far as The Eucharist if they also believed that God was evil?
I guess, the same people who also choose The Pharisees' Canon of The Old Testament as opposed to The Christian Canon of The Old Testament when it came to creating their own bible in the 16th Century.
|
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 5, 2009 17:06:50 GMT -5
I've never heard they believe God is evil, but most Gnostics are dualists, meaning they believe God is in a perpetual war against evil(kind of like yin and yang) and that the "spiritual" things are on God's side, and all matter is inherently evil. So, they strive to be free from the evil in this world which includes all matter. Therefore, Christian Gnostics have a huge problem with the sacraments and the extreme ones don't believe Jesus has flesh and blood at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 6, 2009 9:34:59 GMT -5
I've never heard they believe God is evil, but most Gnostics are dualists, meaning they believe God is in a perpetual war against evil(kind of like yin and yang) and that the "spiritual" things are on God's side, and all matter is inherently evil. So, they strive to be free from the evil in this world which includes all matter. Therefore, Christian Gnostics have a huge problem with the sacraments and the extreme ones don't believe Jesus has flesh and blood at all. Just like Protestants.  |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 8, 2009 9:36:06 GMT -5
Yeah, it seems like most of the old heresies have easily found their way back through protestantism. That's not to say that there's nothing good in protestantism. But if you look at where most denominations end up, it's kind of scary. And look at all the cults that have sprung up in America. Mormons, JW, and many many others (Christian science, David Koresh, Jonestown etc.) have all rejected the Church and claim that they rightly interpret scripture. They are more radical, but what about the more subtle heresies?
And what about the fact that Satan masquerades as an Angel of Light? Somehow people think they are immune to deception, but then why does the Bible warn over and over about accepting sound doctrine, and about antichrists?
|
|
