Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: metmom; ealgeone
Thank you, metmom, for providing the necessary context. This shows that point was NOT that we are not to drink Jesus' blood--- especially since he explicitly commanded us to do so, ("Drink my Blood" --- how can you get more explicit than that?)

As you can see from the context in Acts, the whole idea was to provide for a way for Gentiles to enter the Church tranquilly, without upsetting the Jews by doing things at table that would be unnecessarily provocative: eating meat sacrificed to idols, meat of strangled animals, and blood --- this is in reference to kosher (table) customs, not a restriction against receiving the Lord's blood in Christian worship.

This did not ban receiving Jesus Blood (which is different from supping on pig blood or strangled poultry), because Paul carefully explains this to the Corinthians:

"After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood"

" 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?"

My ealgeone, your supposition about how the disciples would have been capturing His blood at the Cross, or putting their mouths on Christ's wounded side, if they thought it was actually salvific, misses the point that they thought His Blood IS salvific; and Jesus showed them how they were to eat His Body and Blood, at the Last Supper. He identifies that the bread and wine were now His Body and Blood.

This is is what is signified by the words, "This is My Body" and "This is My Blood."<>p> How do you think the Apostles should have responded? "Amen"? Or "Not Really"?!

In terms of pictorial depictions (and by "depiction" I mean painting, as well as depiction by illustrative language in homilies), Christians equate the blood of Communion with both the blood on Calvary and the Blood of the Lamb. They are all the same saving blood:

This was an issue in the Bohemian Reformation of the 15h century, when the reformers (at that time) demanded that the laity be offered both the Body of Christ, and the Precious Blood in the chalice.

Man of Sorrows from Prague, Bohemian Reformation, 1470.

That's why I keep asking: Did any Christian believe the Mass (in the sense of its Eucharistic realism) was in contradiction to the NT until the 16th or 17th century? Might you let me know?

81 posted on 04/24/2018 8:19:31 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Let us commend ourselves, and one another, and our whole life, unto Christ Our God.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]


To: Mrs. Don-o
That's why I keep asking: Did any Christian believe the Mass (in the sense of its Eucharistic realism) was in contradiction to the NT until the 16th or 17th century? Might you let me know?

The ECFs are divided on this issue as they are on the other issues near and dear to Roman Catholicism.

82 posted on 04/24/2018 8:26:07 AM PDT by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o
My ealgeone, your supposition about how the disciples would have been capturing His blood at the Cross, or putting their mouths on Christ's wounded side, if they thought it was actually salvific, misses the point that they thought His Blood IS salvific; and Jesus showed them how they were to eat His Body and Blood, at the Last Supper. He identifies that the bread and wine were now His Body and Blood.

If the disciples believed as Rome claims, they would have been doing exactly that....drinking His actual blood.

That is what Rome teaches....the wine somehow becomes blood.

You might want to check the Greek on the terminology on this issue.

And again...context is your friend on this, and all issues.

1For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea; 2and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3and all ate the same spiritual food; 4and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ. 5Nevertheless, with most of them God was not well-pleased; for they were laid low in the wilderness. 1 Corinthians 10:1-5 NASB

Paul tells us why we have the Lord's Supper.....

25In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 1 Corinthians 11:25-26 NASB

84 posted on 04/24/2018 8:46:06 AM PDT by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Jesus also explicitly says that if you eat and drink you will live forever.

Why are you not taking that literally as well?

It’s in the same passage.

I sure do see an awful lot of Catholic funerals.


100 posted on 04/24/2018 4:27:50 PM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson