Amaleq13

Be glad you weren't a Methodist like me. We had grape juice instead of wine.





I always liked you better than Fafhrd.

NOGO

This is all a misunderstanding.

The body of Christ is the context of the last supper was the word of God. Believers are supposed to "take in" the teachings of the Lord.

For Paul these teachings were not passed on through apostolic tradition and originating from the historical Jesus.

For Paul these teachings were inspired to each and every believer.

The Lord's supper was therefore a gathering where people ate the body of Christ. In practice what that meant is that believers would tell one another what inspirations they received. That was the Lord's supper.

That was all changed when around the 4th century the teachings of Jesus were canonized and nobody was allowed to receive inspiration directly from the Lord. True Christianity was buried and what was left is a bunch of nutty Christians who think that the blessed bred they're eating is actually the body of a man.

They call it a mystery.

sodium

Well, if you believe James Frazer,

http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/frazer/

people have been eating their gods for some time.

It is natural to eat and drink gods who represent aspects of agriculture. If Jesus was going to take over for these gods, he had to show he could replace them. Partly, he accomplished this by showing that he could create food and drink. But if people were used to eating the old gods, Jesus had to be show himself equally fit for digestion. Anyway, that's my theory (probably not original).

Evoken

The body is the word and the blood is the spirit.

I find it amusing how atheists interpret The Bible as litrealy or even more literaly than the "mindless and brainwashed" Christians.

Norseman

It remains vile to eat the body of christ of drink his blood, simply calling it that... it's blood curdling.

It's fine to interpret the bible litterally. Actually believing the litteral interpretation, well, that's another story...

Gawen

I find it amusing, IAsimisI, that the only people that knew what is in the bible were the ones writing it. It is left up to everyone else to interpret it. Lucky us. Since the writers, jesus and god himself are not here to explain what they meant....sauce for the goose, I say. While we atheists try to make heads or tails out of the myths, I find it even more amusing of those that believe it in the first place...whatever their interpretations of it are.

spin

Whoa, there, Brewster. Ya mean ta tell me that that bread wot we gotta eat, that they be tellin' us fer years be the body a Chris', ain't the body of Chris' after all, but the "word"? First it be bread, then it be body, now it be the "word". This shrrr is the confusinest relijun I hear of. Wish they make up they mind. Wot they gonna say nex' week, it be flapjacks, the food a life? An' shoot when I drink the wine -- now that be the best part --, when I drink the wine it be the blood, well come ta think of it, I don' mind that it be spirit -- I prefer at least 20 proof. Well, I don' really mind eatin' the body either. Pass the ketchup, I say -- covers the flavor.

An' I don' see why you boys be so squeamish.


spin

sodium

Where does your interpretation come from? Do you claim to find that interpretation in the text itself? Are you following some other early source? Or is it revealed to you supernaturally?

Also, what do mean by "the word"? Early Christians seem to have used that term to refer to Christ himself (as in John 1:1-5). When Jesus says that "the bread that I will give is my flesh" does this also refer to "the word". And what do you mean by spirit? Do you mean the Holy Spirit of the Trinity? Is your theological statement that the blood of Jesus was the Holy Spirit? Or that the wine represents the blood of Jesus, which in turn represents the Holy Spirit? Or some other spirit?

Does the bread represent Jesus's body, or the word, or both. Is it literally identical to the word? Or to Jesus's body? Or both?

Do you make this interpretation only for Eucharistic passages? Should the Gospels be interpretted as a story about a Jesus who possessed actual flesh and blood, or should they all be interpreted as parables about the word and spirit?

Godless Wonder

And what are the supposed consequences if someone takes communion whilst a dirty sinner?

(Picturing that scene at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark when that Nazi dude melts.)

sodium

1st Corinthians
11:27
Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
11:28
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
11:29
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
11:30
For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.