Zone1 Early Christians believed that the bread and wine used in the Eucharist were transformed into the body and blood of Christ

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
129,954
Reaction score
23,317
Points
2,220
Location
Houston
It's true. Early Christians believed that the bread and wine used in the Eucharist were transformed into the body and blood of Christ.

The Real Presence is taught by St. Paul. “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:26-27).

The Real Presence was taught by the twelve apostles. “Let no one eat and drink of your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; to this, too the saying of the Lord is applicable: ‘Do not give to dogs what is sacred” (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, or Didache, 9:5).

The Real Presence was upheld by early Christians.

It was upheld by St. Ignatius of Antioch in the first century: “Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, circa 90 AD).

It was upheld by St. Justin Martyr in the second century: “This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus” (St. Justin Martyr, First Apology, circa 150 AD).

It was upheld by St. Clement of Alexandria in the third century: “The one, the Watered Wine, nourishes in faith, while the other, the Spirit, leads us on to immortality. The union of both, however, – of the drink and of the Word, – is called the Eucharist, a praiseworthy and excellent gift. Those who partake of it in faith are sanctified in body and in soul. By the will of the Father, the divine mixture, man, is mystically united to the Spirit and to the Word” (St. Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of the Children, circa 202 AD).

It was upheld by St. Cyril of Jerusalem in the fourth century: “Since then He Himself has declared and said of the Bread, (This is My Body), who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He has affirmed and said, (This is My Blood), who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His blood?” (St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, circa 350 AD).

 
Yall believe in weird stuff. Make believe cannibalism lolz
 
Yall believe in weird stuff. Make believe cannibalism lolz
It does seem weird at first glance, but I cannot deny its power. Can you imagine suffering greatly for someone else? Could you do it?
 
It does seem weird at first glance, but I cannot deny its power. Can you imagine suffering greatly for someone else? Could you do it?
The power of make believe cannibalism?
 
"Behold the lamb of God."

Think about it. The "lamb" was a sin offering that was slaughtered and eaten, for the forgiveness of sins. Jesus is the lamb of God. The sin offering for all of humanity. When we eat the wafer of unleavened bread and/or sip the sacramental wine, we are participating in the ritual sacrifice. In essence, the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ - the lamb of God.

"This is my body; this is my blood." It's not ambiguous in any way.

Christians have never offered blood sacrifices even though they were an essential part of worship at the Temple in Jerusalem. What blood sacrifice could possibly be appropriate, when the ultimate blood sacrifice has already occurred and continues to occur amongst the faithful?

This is also why Catholic have "priests" and Prods have ministers. Priests offer sacrifices; ministers do not.

Essentially all religions believe things that are literally unbelievable. That's where faith comes in.
 
I'm sure that's how you see it. Give not that which is holy unto dogs.
Thats what it is. You are pretending to eat a 2k year old dead mans flesh and drink his blood.
 
Thats what it is. You are pretending to eat a 2k year old dead mans flesh and drink his blood.
It's not my job to convince you of anything.
 
Laughing leads to crying.
 
It certainly makes me laugh.
Glad I could make you laugh. But I think the important question was the one I already asked. And even though you didn't answer it, I'm pretty sure we both know your answer.
 
Glad I could make you laugh. But I think the important question was the one I already asked. And even though you didn't answer it, I'm pretty sure we both know your answer.
Yes, thank you. Bring up ridiculous rituals anytime you want lol.
What? Sacrificing myself? I would. But please stop trying to compare me to your savior. I dont want you nibbling on me.
 
It's true. Early Christians believed that the bread and wine used in the Eucharist were transformed into the body and blood of Christ.

The Real Presence is taught by St. Paul. “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:26-27).

The Real Presence was taught by the twelve apostles. “Let no one eat and drink of your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; to this, too the saying of the Lord is applicable: ‘Do not give to dogs what is sacred” (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, or Didache, 9:5).

The Real Presence was upheld by early Christians.

It was upheld by St. Ignatius of Antioch in the first century: “Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, circa 90 AD).

It was upheld by St. Justin Martyr in the second century: “This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus” (St. Justin Martyr, First Apology, circa 150 AD).

It was upheld by St. Clement of Alexandria in the third century: “The one, the Watered Wine, nourishes in faith, while the other, the Spirit, leads us on to immortality. The union of both, however, – of the drink and of the Word, – is called the Eucharist, a praiseworthy and excellent gift. Those who partake of it in faith are sanctified in body and in soul. By the will of the Father, the divine mixture, man, is mystically united to the Spirit and to the Word” (St. Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of the Children, circa 202 AD).

It was upheld by St. Cyril of Jerusalem in the fourth century: “Since then He Himself has declared and said of the Bread, (This is My Body), who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He has affirmed and said, (This is My Blood), who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His blood?” (St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, circa 350 AD).


As an Orthodox Christian, I can tell you we still believe this today.
 
Yes, thank you. Bring up ridiculous rituals anytime you want lol.
What? Sacrificing myself? I would. But please stop trying to compare me to your savior. I dont want you nibbling on me.
Actually it was the second question; does saying the things you are saying make you feel superior? The first question was an important one too though. I figured you would say you would. You see yourself through rose colored glasses.
 
It's true. Early Christians believed that the bread and wine used in the Eucharist were transformed into the body and blood of Christ.

The Real Presence is taught by St. Paul. “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:26-27).

The Real Presence was taught by the twelve apostles. “Let no one eat and drink of your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; to this, too the saying of the Lord is applicable: ‘Do not give to dogs what is sacred” (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, or Didache, 9:5).

The Real Presence was upheld by early Christians.

It was upheld by St. Ignatius of Antioch in the first century: “Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, circa 90 AD).

It was upheld by St. Justin Martyr in the second century: “This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus” (St. Justin Martyr, First Apology, circa 150 AD).

It was upheld by St. Clement of Alexandria in the third century: “The one, the Watered Wine, nourishes in faith, while the other, the Spirit, leads us on to immortality. The union of both, however, – of the drink and of the Word, – is called the Eucharist, a praiseworthy and excellent gift. Those who partake of it in faith are sanctified in body and in soul. By the will of the Father, the divine mixture, man, is mystically united to the Spirit and to the Word” (St. Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of the Children, circa 202 AD).

It was upheld by St. Cyril of Jerusalem in the fourth century: “Since then He Himself has declared and said of the Bread, (This is My Body), who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He has affirmed and said, (This is My Blood), who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His blood?” (St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, circa 350 AD).

In truth we do not know exactly how the early Church viewed the elements or even exactly what Jesus taught at the Last Supper. Did He mean to create a new ritual for worship? Or did He mean for believers to think of him at every breaking of the bread, the taking of the wine, i.e. at every meal? We cannot tell from the Scriptures.

The Church did make it into a ritual exercise to be done with reverence whether Transubstantiation (the elements become the physical body and blood of Christ), Consubstantiation (the essence of the Christ is present in the elements) or, as most Protestant Churches believe, it is a meaningful memorial service to the sacrifice of Jesus, the Christ, and the salvation that he offers us through that sacrifice.

The doctrine of Transubstantiation was not officially adopted by the Roman Catholic Church until I bleieve the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. It was clarified and strengthened at the council of Constance in 1415 and evenmoreso at the Council of Trent in 1551 The doctrine would be challenged by the 14th Century forerunners of the Reformation like John Wycliffe, however, and was rejected by most of the prominent leaders of the Reformation by the 15th and 16th Centuries.

.
 
In truth we do not know exactly how the early Church viewed the elements or even exactly what Jesus taught at the Last Supper. Did he mean to create a new ritual for worship? Or did he mean for believers to think of him at every breaking of the bread, the taking of the wine, i.e. at every meal? We cannot tell from the Scriptures.
Ergo we look to the traditions of the early Christians who were closer to the event than we were.
 
Back
Top Bottom