Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!ucsd!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: johnw@stew.ssl.berkeley.edu (John Warren) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Importance of sacrifice Message-ID: Date: 30 Aug 90 04:27:55 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of California, Berkeley Lines: 27 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article jdd@db.toronto.edu (John DiMarco) writes: > >The scriptures are quite clear. The body and blood of Christ that we >are called to eat and drink is the transformed bread and wine of the >eucharist. Christ did not say that the bread and wine was a sign or symbol >of his body and blood. After Christ blessed and broke the bread, and >gave thanks and passed the cup, he said, without any hedging, that that >bread and wine *was* his body and blood. > So what you are saying is that at the Last Supper the body of Christ held in his hands (and then broke) the body of Christ. That's too hard to believe. When Jesus said, "This is my body, this is my blood," his flesh was still on his bones and his blood was still in his veins. Anything is possible with God, but not everything is probable with him. The twelve never took it to mean that they were physically eating Jesus's flesh and blood, and Jesus never expected them to do so. He said something so utterly ridiculous that they were shocked into attention. When Jesus was supposed to say, "My Father was a wandering Aramean (according to the Jewish ritual)..." he goes and says "This is my body...", thus pointing to himself as the fulfilment of the Passover. When we eat the bread, we proclaim and hang on to the promise that Jesus was beaten and his body bruised for our healing (yes, physical healing!); when we drink the wine, we proclaim and hang on to the promise that Jesus's blood was shed for the forgiveness of our sin and of our sins (even the ones we commit tomorrow). Yes, the Eucharist is a shocker, but not because of transubstation.