Where did the Body of Christ begin ?

[Tomlane]

Hi Francis, thanks for the input, you more then likely answered the question I had for Rick and I know remember there are rules on her forbidding any one to mention about the true bread of life in regards to Mother Rome.
Thanks again Francis, Tomlane

 

[dan p]

Hi Paidion . I have to take issue with your understanding of Luke 17:21 .

1) The words in question are The kingdom of God is within you .

2) The Greek word is ENTOS , and means " in the midst ".

3) It was NOT within the Jesus rejecting Pharisees , SORRY .

4) It is saying Jesus is the Kingdom , and IS NOT within the Pharisees .

 

[Tomlane]

Francis, where is scripture to find where Christ can be turned into a piece of bread or wafer and his blood into wine.

According to what I read in scripture, Christ gave his blood for sin and where would you find where one can magically turn his wine to blood and how come the properties of wine never change into the properties of blood and a bread or wafer into real flesh?

By way Francis much of what you write I could take as inflammatory if I allowed my flesh and pride get in the way. I hope your god is above that and you can discuss such things.

Tomlane

 

[francisdesales]

Francis, where is scripture to find where Christ can be turned into a piece of bread or wafer and his blood into wine.

And where in the Old Testament does it say God will become flesh? And yet, that's what happened. Unless you don't buy that either...

If I recall, Jesus said THIS IS MY BODY, as He passed around BREAD... And what exactly was in the cup? "MY BLOOD" He said...

Yet again, you don't know Scriptures.

By way Francis much of what you write I could take as inflammatory if I allowed my flesh and pride get in the way. I hope your god is above that and you can discuss such things.

And the Eucharistic snack was what again?

From your point of view, I would be upset if I was constantly shown how wrong I was from Scriptures, too... Your bombastic claims notwithstanding, you seem to be unable to handle the most basic of Christian concepts. Nor are you able to piece together any sort of argument backed by Scriptures. You rarely answer with a counter argument, telling me baloney about not wanting to cause schism and promptly abandon ship to take up your false preachings elsewhere.

Maybe you shouldn't participate in an Apologetic Forum, if you cannot defend your point of view. Just try to read and see where that goes.

Regards

 

[dadof10]

Francis, where is scripture to find where Christ can be turned into a piece of bread or wafer and his blood into wine.

"This is my Body"..."This is my Blood"...

For the record, calling the Eucharist "snack" is offensive. If your intent is to get this thread shut down because Francis is making you look foolish, you will succeed if you keep it up.

 

[Tomlane]

dadof10, Christ is not a wafer or a piece of bread, but He is the bread of life and the only way anyone can eat of Christ is spiritually,

Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
1 Corinthians 14:20

I hope this next verse will give you some understanding of God's word.

And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
John 6:35

Your Sunday event doesn't last long for it did you would never hunger for it again. Christ said so.

I am that bread of life.
John 6:48

For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Philippians 3:3

Now if the above should offend you, I suggest you take it up with God for I have only given you proof from His word.

I do believe all who take the so called communion have no idea about Christ changing the passover to a future time and that He is referring for them how to do the passover in the future. It was not every Sunday by the way the first day of the week but it was a once a year event that lasted for a week and no where in scripture will you find where Christ changed any of that ordinance. You would do well to study you're old testament law that applied only to Jews.

I hope that will help you.

Tomlane

 

[dadof10]

dadof10, Christ is not a wafer or a piece of bread, but He is the bread of life and the only way anyone can eat of Christ is spiritually

Chapter and verse, please.

I hope this next verse will give you some understanding of God's word.

And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
John 6:35

And what is this Bread? I hope this next verse will give you some understanding:

"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." (John (RSV) 6)

The bread is His Flesh, right? Next verse:

"The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?""

Did Jesus then say, "Whoa...I was speaking symbolically, the only way anyone can eat of Christ is spiritually"??? Nope. He said:

53 So Jesus said to them, "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;
54 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.
58 This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever." (John (RSV) 6)

Does this sound like symbolic language to you?

After hearing this even His Disciples questioned Him and some even left and "no longer went around with Him". Why was this teaching so hard if He was merely speaking symbolically? Why did they leave and why did Jesus let them?

Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
1 Corinthians 14:20

Indeed.

Your Sunday event doesn't last long for it did you would never hunger for it again. Christ said so.

Huh? What does length have to do with anything?

Now if the above should offend you, I suggest you take it up with God for I have only given you proof from His word.

Where does His Word call the Eucharist a "snack"? That is what offends me.

I do believe all who take the so called communion have no idea about Christ changing the passover to a future time and that He is referring for them how to do the passover in the future. It was not every Sunday by the way the first day of the week but it was a once a year event that lasted for a week and no where in scripture will you find where Christ changed any of that ordinance. You would do well to study you're old testament law that applied only to Jews.

Communion is not a substitute for the Passover. It is a Christian Tradition and has nothing to do with Judaism. You would do well to actually know what you are talking about.

 

[Free]

Acts 2 would be the best of the choices although one could make the argument that the body of Christ began with the calling of the Twelve.

 

[Imagican]

Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and broke it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

It's not a snack nor is it from "Mother Rome" as you put it.
Many here are not Catholic and participate in faith in communion.
Discuss communion as you wish but I would advice doing so in an appropriate manner befitting a Christian and refrain from referring to the Catholic belief with inflammatory remarks.
That goes for everyone.

And I would ask WHERE did this tradition of a tiny wafer or a 'sip' of grape juice ACTUALLY COME FROM? For what is mentioned in the Word is 'a MEAL' in rememberance. WHO altered it into a 'chip' of 'bread' and a 'sip' of wine? That is what Tom was refering to I believe.

MEC

 

[Imagican]

And how unfair to discuss such issues without being able to confront the REASON that so many have been led astray in an understanding of it.

While it IS true that MOST denominations follow the practice, not ALL follow it in the SAME manner. But we are placed in a postition to be unable to discuss the differences from a 'theological' standpoint.

It would seem that those that started this tradition are being allowed to continue in it's influence in total disregard for the truth. Once again, 'man-made' traditions winning out over The Word of God.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Tomlane]

It would seem that those that started this tradition are being allowed to continue in it's influence in total disregard for the truth. Once again, 'man-made' traditions winning out over The Word of God.

Blessings,

MEC

:amen

 

[francisdesales]

Once again, 'man-made' traditions winning out over The Word of God.

How ironic, I was thinking you fall into that very category, for your own impressions of Scriptures are merely man-made traditions that you have invented in contradistinction to the pillar and foundation of the Truth, the Church!

Look to the lumber in your own eye.

Regards

 

[Imagican]

Once again, 'man-made' traditions winning out over The Word of God.

How ironic, I was thinking you fall into that very category, for your own impressions of Scriptures are merely man-made traditions that you have invented in contradistinction to the pillar and foundation of the Truth, the Church!

Look to the lumber in your own eye.

Regards

I guess allowing certain people immunity from attack is able to bolster courage and confrontation in those receiving such 'special treatment'.

Fran,

I simply accept the Word as offered. I'm not going to answer one day and be forced to blame YOU or anyone else for has been revealed to ME. My Salvation is dependant upon NOTHING that you are ABLE to 'give' me, (or sell).

That you would insist that I MUST do it YOUR way is a pure indication of the flesh winning out over The Spirit.

I teach NO SUCH tradition AT ALL. I simply offer what has been revealed and do it willingly and for FREE.

The Bible offers that Christ sat with HIs apostles and ate a "last meal" before they were scattered. Yes, He broke bread, Yes, He passed 'the cup'. From Paul's writtings to the Corinthians it becomes apparent that what the apostles taught was the 'eathing of a MEAL' in a rememberance. Period. But NO WHERE is it WRITTEN for our edification that He handed out chips and sips. And NO where is it mentioned that Paul or Peter or ANY other was suppose to PRETEND to BE Christ 'handing out 'chips and sips' in 'rememberance of Him'. That IS a 'man-made tradition' PURE AND SIMPLE. That you have become SO blinded by the faith that you follow that you are unable to even ADMIT that just goes to show how EASY it can be to get LOST in 'traditions' instead of following what matters MOST.

Your accusations are moot to the ears of those that KNOW BETTER. And you simply SHOW the contempt that your church has for ANY other when you DO SO, (make your contemptuous accusations). The Church is NOT an 'individual group' that is ABLE to BE separate from it's brothers and sisters. Yet you would have us believe that what YOUR church teaches is the ONLY semblance of truth in existence. With all the history and all the FACTS that are NOW openly available, you would still insist that what you have been taught is all there is to The Truth. Hmmmmm...................

We WERE told to follow the traditions as 'set down by the apostles'. We were NEVER told that it was OK to change and alter them to suit OUR will. I have done NOTHING of the sort. From YOUR perspective, this may be so, but in truth, I have done nothing of the sort.

Blessings,

MEC

I teach NO such 'tradition'.

 

[Free]

This thread has ventured far off topic. There are more than enough threads about baptism and the Lord's Supper. Any more of this off-topic discussion and this will be locked.

Thanks.

 

[francisdesales]

I guess allowing certain people immunity from attack is able to bolster courage and confrontation in those receiving such 'special treatment'.

If you got something to say to me, then PM me. I don't need "special immunity", nor do I receive special treatment. Quite the opposite, as I am not allowed to go into details of my faith, while you have an open forum to discuss your own musings...

I simply accept the Word as offered. I'm not going to answer one day and be forced to blame YOU or anyone else for has been revealed to ME. My Salvation is dependant upon NOTHING that you are ABLE to 'give' me, (or sell).

Back at you. Or don't you realize that?

That you would insist that I MUST do it YOUR way is a pure indication of the flesh winning out over The Spirit.

It isn't "My way". It is clearly delineated in Scriptures. I point it out, and you do not want to hear or read it. That's not my fault that you don't want to hear the truth because it requires you to change who you are or how you live your life.

I teach NO SUCH tradition AT ALL. I simply offer what has been revealed and do it willingly and for FREE.

You teach the tradition of Imagican. I prefer the Word of God.

The Bible offers that Christ sat with HIs apostles and ate a "last meal" before they were scattered. Yes, He broke bread, Yes, He passed 'the cup'. From Paul's writtings to the Corinthians it becomes apparent that what the apostles taught was the 'eathing of a MEAL' in a rememberance. Period. But NO WHERE is it WRITTEN for our edification that He handed out chips and sips.

I didn't realize that bread and wine was not a meal. Maybe you enjoy the ability to spread out before yourself a five course meal with each of your sittings, and do not comprehend that some people (esp. those of 2000 years ago) were quiet satisfied with bread and wine as a meal.

And NO where is it mentioned that Paul or Peter or ANY other was suppose to PRETEND to BE Christ 'handing out 'chips and sips' in 'rememberance of Him'.

Pretend? I didn't realize we pretend anything. Simply put, Christ says "THIS IS MY BODY" as He passes out bread.

Answer me this: What is in the cup? What does Christ call the contents of the cup at the Last Supper?

If this scandalizes you, it is not surprising, having a fleshy mind. Christ said only those with a spiritual mind can understand this (John 6). Many with fleshy minds also left Christ over these teachings, so it is to be expected that people would continue to scoff at His teachings.

That IS a 'man-made tradition' PURE AND SIMPLE.

Please identify what a "man-made" tradition is?

That you have become SO blinded by the faith that you follow that you are unable to even ADMIT that just goes to show how EASY it can be to get LOST in 'traditions' instead of following what matters MOST.

Again, you do not understand the first thing about Catholicism. You think we look at the Eucharist as ONLY Christ's Body. No, it is much more. Naturally, there is a spiritual component of the Eucharist. However, since you deny what Scripture attests to, that is what we concentrate on when we apologize against sectarians like yourself.

Your accusations are moot to the ears of those that KNOW BETTER.

Did you ask someone who knows better to verify that information???

And you simply SHOW the contempt that your church has for ANY other when you DO SO, (make your contemptuous accusations).

You DON'T know better. What more can I say?

The Church is NOT an 'individual group' that is ABLE to BE separate from it's brothers and sisters.

We don't define "Church" as you try to portray of us. Yet again, your knowledge of Catholicism is lacking. Perhaps you should read "Lumen Gentium" from Vatican 2. We don't separate ourselves from our brothers and sisters. If anyone separates themselves, it is sectarians such as yourself who do not WANT to be part of the visible community that Christ formed.

Hey, you have free will. But don't get on your soap box and tell me about US separating from our "brothers and sisters". We continue to call these our separated brothers and sisters - NOT because we pushed them out the door, Mike. They left of their own free will.

Yet you would have us believe that what YOUR church teaches is the ONLY semblance of truth in existence. With all the history and all the FACTS that are NOW openly available, you would still insist that what you have been taught is all there is to The Truth.

As usual, your rhetoric oversteps what I have actually said, numerous times. I have NEVER said that the Catholic Church possesses ALL the truth, nor have I EVER said that other groups have NONE. That is an outright lie, and if you keep saying it, I'll have to become more vocal in calling you a liar.

Other Christian groups, my separated brothers, for example, believe that God is a Trinity of persons. They possess truth and they teach it without our dictates or interference. They hold to the Catholic faith of their fathers, before the days of Luther.

We WERE told to follow the traditions as 'set down by the apostles'. We were NEVER told that it was OK to change and alter them to suit OUR will. I have done NOTHING of the sort. From YOUR perspective, this may be so, but in truth, I have done nothing of the sort.

[/quote]

It depends on what tradition you are speaking of. Did Paul, for example, intend that every woman in all times and places, cover their head at Mass??? Is this part of our faith, meant to be adhered to at all times? How about slavery? Is that another tradition of the Apostles?

You see, the Church teaches us what are valid Apostolic Traditions to be upheld for all times as part of our faith, as well as traditions that are meant for only a time or particular culture/place. The commands that immediately follow the Council in Jerusalem is another example. Some are not meant for all communities or all times.

Regards

 

[Rick W]

When it gets to the point of posting opinions of what another member believes or why, then the topic isn't being followed. Could the thread get back on track and with some form of civil discussion please?

totopic

 

[dan p]

Hi Rick, and thank you for trying to get it back to the OP, for no one has answered the OP , NOR have they COME close nor have they disprove the OP .

 

[Rick W]

Hi Rick, and thank you for trying to get it back to the OP, for no one has answered the OP , NOR have they COME close nor have they disprove the OP .

"nor have they disprove the OP"
"for no one has answered the OP"

So was OP a statement or was it a question?

 

[Free]

Hi Rick, and thank you for trying to get it back to the OP, for no one has answered the OP , NOR have they COME close nor have they disprove the OP .

As I posted on page 2:

"Acts 2 would be the best of the choices although one could make the argument that the body of Christ began with the calling of the Twelve."

 

[dan p]

Hi Rick , it is a statement of fact , and no one examined or did not rebut scripture given . It began in Act 9 with the Apostle Paul and 1 Tim 1:15 proves that Paul was th first one in the Body of Christ , The word chief in 15 , is the Greek word PROTOS and means first , and v 15 is a bad translation .