Posted on 04/26/2002 9:01:52 AM PDT by WhatNot
Many churches focus on the "eucharist," which for them means the bread of the Lord's Supper. Other believer's don't think the concept of the eucharist is Biblical. But the concept of "eucharist" is Biblical. The word "eucharist" comes from the Greek "eu" meaning "good" and "charis" meaning "grace" or "blessing." The eucharist at the Last Supper was not the bread itself, but the blessing Messiah said over the bread. The blessing is one said in Jewish homes to this day: "Baruch Atah Adonai Elohaynu Melech Ha Olam, Ha Motzee Lechem Min Ha Aretz" - "Blessed are You O Lord Our God, King of the Universe, Who brings forth bread from the earth." This is the true eucharist.
The true eucharist is never eaten, it is given. It is a blessing of thanks to God. It's not the bread, it is the blessing over the bread. And this distinction can change your life. Life doesn't consist of the things you have, but the blessings you say over them. You only truly have what you bless and give thanks for. Give the blessing of thanks over your, bread - your parents, your family, your friends, your situation - over everything, good and bad. And your life itself will be truly blessed, for such is the true eucharist.
Luke 22:14-20
TODAY'S MISSION
Prepare a private communion service today, with you and Messiah. Lift up to Him those things that need to receive His blessing - your loved ones, your job, your ministry.
Psalm 91:4a He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge; Does this passage mean that God is a chicken?
or when Jesus said "I am the bread of life" Does that mean that Jesus is a loaf of bread?
In other words, is this figurative speaking or should we take it as literally speaking?
Read the quotes in post 44 and you'll have your answer.
We just went over this again last week and the CONCLUSION after reposting everything was that HE DID SAY IT WAS ONLY AN INSULT. He said that FROM THE BEGINNING.. You were merciless with him and you owe him an apology. (How's that?)
That is an important point Jean. Bluntness is not always comfortable, but it is far different than hate..especially when the intent is to save
I think you should be more concerned about whether or not the_doc is indeed correct rather than how blunt he was with words he has chosen to use. If the_doc was correct, then he has a point.
When I was younger, my father used to spank me. My mother even slapped my face -was that hateful?
Of course not, it was extreme, perhaps not as extreme as it could have been, but it was extreme. It was done, however, for my best.
It seems to me, that ultimate 'hate' would be to simply allow you to wollow in your deception with out comment. That is 'hateful'. Quite frankly, I always take to heart a good rebuking -especially one done in private.
Were the_doc's words blunt? yes
Were they hateful? I can understand the desire to see them that way, but we must also look at the_doc's intentions.
Did the_doc 'intend' to spew hateful rhetroic at you simply to bolster his 'ego'? Hardly
Rather, I think I saw respect for you as a person ("...I don't look down on you. You even seem like a bright, interesting fellow...").
Take the fact that he was blunt, to the point (rather than that 'hateful' cliche) as well as having the best intentions (regardless of whether you agree with him, he is interested in the truth which is the best for you or I) and think on the possiblity that he is, indeed, correct regarding RCC doctrine, and you might just gain appreciation for the fact that he is intending to share with you what he believes is of ultimate importance.
The ultimate 'hate' would be simply to allow you to stand in ignorance.
respectfully (really!)
Jean
As Jean pointed out all blunt language is not hate or a threat...remember why they crucified Christ?..He was no threat..but they did "think" He was...He was blunt and challanged the establishment...
Sometimes what people want is vengeance not justice! There is a big difference..
I would also say Tiki...If you have to silence your critics..you need to check your message..:>))
Selected lines from your minister:
You are a disgrace to your profession, of course.
Ah, but your demonic controller will never let you be reasonable about this stuff.
You spiritual idiots would rather go to hell than to admit that a Protestant is right
And I happen to be a saint. Already. It is quite literally the greatest thing in the world. On the other hand, you are--to put it bluntly--Satanically screwed.
Either way, on Judgment Day, I win.
Most sane people would read this as someones desperate attempt to maintain their ego at all costs when they are very clearly losing the battle.
of course
good thing ma worked detox
‘But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.’ (John 12:32)
"The world that Jesus saw was shaped by the brute forces of the Roman empire. Emporers held people in subjection by commanding vast armies. It was a world managed by the will of the strongest. The Jewish nation was among the those held subject. Yet, though they were compelled to yield to Roman might, they would themselves have used the same means to overthrow their rulers, if they could. Indeed, they tried often enough, to their great sorrow."
"Jesus said, "unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed, but if it dies, it produces many seeds." In saying that, Jesus was advocating something new. He was challenging the conventional wisdom. He was proposing that a... life devoted alone to its own preservation---is a fruitless life. It is like a seed never planted. But a life yielded, in selfless service, brings forth benefits a hundredfold."
"On this principle, Jesus was prepared to stake his whole mission. He was prepared to claim that his willingness to be "lifted up from the earth" (a reference to his sacrificial death), would cause the world to be attracted to him. He was sure that ultimately, the universe would back sacrificial love, rather than force of arms."
"God help me to believe that love is the greatest power in the world."
I regard you as a silly cannibal
you are idiots and cannibals to boot
makes you a superstitious religious dork.
Nope. No bigotry or hatred showing hear. Just a mild rebuke in perfect christian charity, with proper respect for Brian as a person. I shudder to think what this bunch would deem as a hateful, bigoted thing to say to a catholic.
God bless you for defending our faith Brian. You do a wonderful job. I'm sorry to hear about your siblings, I will remember them and you in prayer. Do you know that it was some anti-catholic garbage that caused me to research and study the faith and then to finally convert 9 years ago? Talk about unintended consequences!
I've known numerous Calvinists -- one of my best friends is an orthodox presbyterian, and I was the best man at his wedding. And of them, although they all have expressed their firm belief that the Catholic Church is decidedly in the wrong, and its beliefs are anti-Christian, never once have any of them treated me in such a manner as the_doc wrote in his e-mail. Not even close. I've debated with my aquaintances and friends who are Calvinists, going over various doctrines, church fathers, etc. And at the end of it, we basically agree to disagree; but it doesn't affect our friendship, or the fellowship we share in Christ, despite our very stark differences of belief. Although I was aware of Calvinists who believed as the_doc does, I would never, in a thousand years, fathom the depth of deep-seated hatred he expressed in that freepmail.
I honestly feel dirty for having read it. I feel spiritually soiled by witnessing it; the only thing I can compare it to is sitting through some awful movie, like Natural Born Killers (that is, the feeling I have).
This ping that you sent me has even been a cause for sin to me, because I allowed myself to relish in the thought of the_doc burning in hell. I am gravely repentant for allowing that thought to enter into my mind, and reveling in it for a moment before pushing it out, and will now have to confess it on Saturday.
It seems to me that by and large, most Christians on these threads, whatever the denomination, manage to at least keep their tones not too far embroiled in un-Christian manner. Certainly there are personal attacks from time to time: accusations of lying/deceiving, belittling of one another's particular tenets of faith, and even insults. But nothing have I ever read so far that is so bald-facedly full of hatred and venom.
I read some poster on these threads trying to come to the_doc's defense (which at first, I found laughable, but tried to suspend my disbelief to weight the merits of the case), and it seemed to hinge on the fact of "What if he's (the_doc) right?"
And so, I tried to imagine that the_doc was right, and then I re-read the letter, under the assumption that the RCC was in fact an evil institution. Never, in my wildest imaginations, could I imagine Christ saying those words, even though I imagined that the RCC was in fact wrong. Never could I imagine any of the apostles saying anything like that.
And we're supposed to believe, according to at least 2 Calvinists who are trying to defend the_doc here on this thread, that these words were spoken in some kind of "love"? Does anything in the_doc's freepmail resemble, even by the slightest of relations, St. Paul's description of the attributes of "love" that is so often repeated at wedding ceremonies?
When we take the_doc's freepmail and compare it against Scripture -- against the specific area in Scripture that deals with love -- then we are able to see just how much the_doc's freepmail was rather inspired by hatred instead.
It was encouraging to see a Bible-only Christian condemn the_doc's freepmail. I'm disgusted at the 2 Calvinist posters that I've read so far on these threads who somehow can condone this type of action by the_doc.
I can't even get to the end of writing this post before feeling the temptation of reveling in un-Christian thoughts about the_doc and now the 2 Calvinist posters, and so I'm going to stop participating in this thread because it is a near-occasion of sin for me.
Gentlemen, it is here, in verse 63, that the Lord himself tells us that he is speaking in metaphor. - Please read all of the chapter in the same sitting!
As Jean pointed out all blunt language is not hate or a threat
You two are to be pitied for defending the_doc's words. His words and your defense of them speak volumes about your own spiritual state. Be careful, these are the words you are defending as "Love" and "spreading the gospel"
You are a disgrace to your profession, of course.
Ah, but your demonic controller will never let you be reasonable about this stuff. You spiritual idiots would rather go to hell than to admit that a Protestant is right
And I happen to be a saint. Already. It is quite literally the greatest thing in the world. On the other hand, you are--to put it bluntly--Satanically screwed.
Either way, on Judgment Day, I win.
I regard you as a silly cannibal
you are idiots and cannibals to boot
makes you a superstitious religious dork.
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.