Posted on 10/27/2011 4:05:56 PM PDT by rzman21
Paul posed two questions in 1 Corinthians 10 that can be answered yes or no. Christians answer yes, you appear to answer no since you are emphasizing “spiritual”.
Paul does not say the cup of blessing we bless is a SPIRITUAL sharing in the blood of Christ. he could have, but he did not, beacuse it is not spiritual.
Christians have believed Paul for 2,000 years.’
non-Christians, not so much.
And earlier in 1 Corinthians 10 he specifically said what he was talking about.
1 Corinthians 10:3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
>> Paul does not say the cup of blessing we bless is a SPIRITUAL sharing in the blood of Christ.<<
Did you not read verse 3 and 4?
That is what Paul's ministry was about: Circumcision made without hands: Spiritual. Baptism into the Body of Christ: Spiritual. Our state of being: seated in heavenly places in Christ: Spiritual. Our conversation being in heaven: Spiritual. Putting no faith in the outward man, but renewing the inward man day by day: Spiritual.
Why would Paul then go back to something that is after the outward man? Something to satisfy the flesh, but in no way satisfies the inward man? He wouldn't. In this age of the grace of God, where Christ is SEATED in the heavenlies and the believer is seated with Him, spiritually, how do you think He comes down into a wafer and literally becomes FLESH to you? He doesn't and 1 Cor. 10 does not tell you He does.
why would someone want to twist Scriptures to try and make them say what Christians have rejected for 2,000 years?
who is behind this perversion?
Were they essential to the thief on the cross??
Are you saying EVERYTHING the church fathers taught was infallible truth?
Did the apostles actually eat Christ's body at the last supper? Did Christ eat it?
i would refer you to post #87 so you can educate yourself about what Christians have believed for 2,000 years.
if someone wants to reject the words of Jesus and 2,000 years of consistent apostolic, orthodox, biblical teaching, i can’t enlighten them.
the devil attacks the Church in many ways, one of them being those that quote Scripture . nothing new under the sun.
can you imagine the height of arrogance to presume no one understood the Lord’s Supper for 16 centuries?
simply amazing, but then again there are a whole lot of folks in Utah that agree that the Church went totally apostate after the Apostles died. great company to keep.
no
LOL, the thief on the cross died before the great commission was given and Peter taught baptism was for the remission of sins.
uh oh, another doctrine no one understood for 16 centuries.
all those apsostates at Nicea didn’t know what they were talking about, right?
So then the work of the church fathers is cherry picked to say what the Rc wants them to say
you are an interesting fellow.
just curious, is there any human being you consider a Christian that lived between 96ad and 1500ad that you would have worshipped with and shared the Lord’s Supper with?
anyone?
if yes, please name him or her.
So it is your position that the means of salvation chanced ?
you cracked the code, i thought us papists were able to keep that to ourselves.
no, the means of salvation has always been the Body of Christ. Paul tells us where are baptized into Christ.
boy, the devil hates baptism and the Eucharist doesn’t he?
When was this added that wasn’t there when 1 Corinthians was written in 59AD?
1 Corinthians 10:3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
>>who is behind this perversion?<<
My guess is the RCC. That was part of the problem when the translation from the original languages when they found that what the RCC was teaching was different than what the documents in the original languages said. That led to the Reformation.
CB, you are another interesting fellow.
want to take a crack at my questions in post #112?
any Christians between 95ad and 1500ad?
just curious, is there any human being you consider a Christian that lived between 96ad and 1500ad that you would have worshipped with and shared the Lord’s Supper with? anyone?
The NT church had no priests, no popes, no indulgences, no purgatory , no mass, no crosses, no icons, and in fact had no teaching on "transubstantiation" ... so if you REALLY want to point to the NT church you never look to Rome..
I ask again..did the apostles actually eat the flesh of christ at the last supper ...he did say “This is my body” ...was it? was it His actual flesh?
Or the horror when those who were tasked with translating from the original languages into English found that what the RCC was teaching was not consistent with the original language documents?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.