Results 41 - 48 of 48
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: dschaertel Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | communion: symbolic or something more? | 1 Cor 11:29 | dschaertel | 84941 | ||
Even taking the body as the church doesn't exempt one from understanding the idea of the true presence of Christ in the form of bread and wine. The church according to Paul is the "body of Christ". I accept that as quite literally true. Since the covenant that Jesus instituted is the Lords Supper, that same presence must be manifest in the elements of the covenant. Take for example the writing of a check. Obviously it isn't cash money, yet when authorized by the one who owns the money, it becomes money to the person it is made out to. It is in the form of a check, but it is effectually money. Not merely a symbol. |
||||||
42 | communion: symbolic or something more? | 1 Cor 11:29 | dschaertel | 84943 | ||
Even taking the body as the church doesn't exempt one from understanding the idea of the true presence of Christ in the form of bread and wine. The church according to Paul is the "body of Christ". I accept that as quite literally true. Since the covenant that Jesus instituted is the Lords Supper, that same presence must be manifest in the elements of the covenant. Take for example the writing of a check. Obviously it isn't cash money, yet when authorized by the one who owns the money, it becomes money to the person it is made out to. It is in the form of a check, but it is effectually money. Not merely a symbol. |
||||||
43 | communion: symbolic or something more? | 1 Cor 11:29 | dschaertel | 84944 | ||
Even taking the body as the church doesn't exempt one from understanding the idea of the true presence of Christ in the form of bread and wine. The church according to Paul is the "body of Christ". I accept that as quite literally true. Since the covenant that Jesus instituted is the Lords Supper, that same presence must be manifest in the elements of the covenant. Take for example the writing of a check. Obviously it isn't cash money, yet when authorized by the one who owns the money, it becomes money to the person it is made out to. It is in the form of a check, but it is effectually money. Not merely a symbol. |
||||||
44 | communion: symbolic or something more? | 1 Cor 11:29 | dschaertel | 85027 | ||
Jesus' words in verse 25 of 1Corinthians 11 says that "this cup is the new covenant in my blood". It is with the cup of Communion that he establishes his covenant. As for the why he must be present... the incarnation is what makes Christianity different from any other religion. The idea that God took on the form of a man, not that man was a god. We believe in the incarnation. God said in the presence of the human Jesus "this is my som in whom I am well pleased". The fact that Jesus declared the bread to be his body and the wine to be his blood while still present in no way prevents it from being literally true. God took on human form and Christ takes on the form of bread and wine when offered in the context of Holy Communion. The check is worthless until it is signed by the owner of the money. Then the money takes on the form of the check. The chekc doesn't actually become gold which is in it self just another "token". But effectually the money takes on the form of the check. Likewise the sacrificial body and blood of Christ Jesus takes on the form of bread and wine. When we partake of it in a worhy manner, that is discerning the body of the Lord, we then are united as the body of Christ. If we say that the bread and wine are merely symbols then we are saying that they have no effect other than what we bring to it. There is no forgiveness of sins apart from our own contribution. But if we recognize that the body and blood are truely present to us in the form of bread and wine, the forgiveness of sins is already accomplished. Paul says in 1Corinthians 10:16 This cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a distribution of the blood of Christ. This bread that we break, is it not a distribution of the body of Christ. |
||||||
45 | communion: symbolic or something more? | 1 Cor 11:29 | dschaertel | 85029 | ||
Money in these forms is not merely a symbol. A symbol has no value. The check and other forms of money have value because they are authorized. There is a promise associated with it. It becomes effectually money. Money takes the form of the check. Just as God took on the form of a man. Jesus was 100 percent human. He was a man like any other man. He had blood and DNA etc... The bread and wine are still bread and wine. The sacrificial body and blood of Christ take on the form of bread and wine just as God took on the form of a man. It is, however, only in the context of Holy Communion that this occurs. All bread and wine are obviously not the body and blood of Christ. |
||||||
46 | Will we be here once anti-Christ appears | 1 John 2:18 | dschaertel | 86163 | ||
1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. The word that is translated "time" here is a specific, definite, fixed time. Since John was referring to his present time, there is no way that he can mean today or some indeterminite future day. Either John doesn't know the language with which he wrote, or he was referring to a time when he was alive. The events of Revelation occurred in John's life time. The end of the age was the end of the old covenant capped off by the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD. It would be a long discussion, and probably not appropriate for this forum, but Revelation is a done deal. The people that insist that God doesn't ever fulfill his promises keep ignoring the facts of history. Before you try to even respond to this do yourself a favor and read Josephus' accounts of what happened between 64 and 71 AD. Keep the scriptures close at your side. It will blow your mind. It's all been accomplished, and God won. |
||||||
47 | Will we be here once anti-Christ appears | 1 John 2:18 | dschaertel | 86172 | ||
Your point misses the mark since it is quite commonly understood that Paul wrote to Timothy before the year 70AD. Ooops, minor detail, but a big one. |
||||||
48 | Will we be here once anti-Christ appears | 1 John 2:18 | dschaertel | 86198 | ||
It serves no purpose to argue this point too far because the fact is nobody really knows for sure when Revelation was written, or more importantly when the vision occurred. There is strong evidence in the text itself to suggest a pre-70AD date. The 95AD date is derived largely from some ambigious account from Eusebius, but Eusebius didn't even think that the Apostle John was the John in Revelation. There really is little hard evidence either way. As for future things, the New Jerusalem is the church, and yes while the church began at Pentacost, it still is now and forever. The church was going to need hope and help to make it through the period of persecution it would face in it's early history. John could have certainly been recounting past events to show how God is faithfull fo rthe benefit of the church. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] |