Why I don't believe in the Real Presence.

[Dimmesdale]

In this post I want to adduce reasons for why, even if I were a Christian, I would not believe that the Communion Hosts in Catholic and Orthodox churches are the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ....

This is because the evidence that such is the case in the Bible is scant and easily explainable through alternative conjectures that are also very reasonable. I will go through some right now. Furthermore, in addition to these, I challenge anyone to offer me any argument to the contrary that I cannot rationally rebut in a similar way....

1. Firstly, "the hard saying" line in the Gospel when Jesus in the Last Supper blesses the bread and wine and says explicitly that this is indeed his body and blood.... The argument in the affirmative goes something like this: if Jesus was speaking metaphorically, why does this symbolism differ so markedly from other symbolic statements. Jesus has referred to himself as the "Door" to eternal life, but he never claimed that a real door in the real world was him.... Why is this the sole instance where Jesus literally says that He IS what He Holds Up, namely real wine and bread?

My answer to this is this: There are few things quite as concrete and real to us as food. Food sustains us. Without food we would die. Food is Real, Tangible, Actual.... Just so Jesus, or God, is Real and not imaginary. God's grace is such that it can't be written off as a fanciful phantasm. It is REAL, once again. So Jesus associating himself with something so literal and concrete is not far-fetched at all.

2. Secondly, there is the other instance where Jesus mentions other people eating "his flesh", as it were in no uncertain terms (John 6:49-51) Jesus seems to make a demarcation between bread and himself, the bread being his "flesh" once more. This itself seems like an argument against the RP because, well, in my opinion we are not reducible to our bodies.... Be that as it may, Catholics and others may use this to suggest that the Host is flesh, and Jesus didn't clarify to the contrary.....

My answer here is Relational. Jesus obviously is stressing the deeply personal aspect of himself. To Love God is to be in intimate communion with him, so that it is TANTAMOUNT to an act as visceral as EATING FLESH. To Eat something is to incorporate it materially with oneself... a fusion. In other words, INTIMACY. So, similarly like in the first case, one may see this as an instance of the Radical Concrete... but still a symbol....

3. Thirdly is, the expressions used in the Bible regarding the eating of Jesus' flesh.... The Greek word "phagein" which means simply "to eat" switches to "trogein" a "coarser" word meaning to "munch" or "to chew" -- used in classical Greek of animals eating....

My answer here is, likewise, along similar lines. When human beings eat, we do so with enthusiasm, with passion, with eagerness.... In a sense, to munch in such a way on God's grace is to be naked and primal. This is life-sustaining food that speaks to us in the most primal of recesses. God inter-penetrates us with his grace, coming down to our level in a way, God encounters us in our sin, in our animality, in our Naked Being.... So, the use of such words is far from far fetched. Rather, it is expected.

4. Fourthly, we go back to the "hard saying" line, in which after hearing of Jesus teaching, "many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about him." The proponents of this view say that this points to the fact that Jesus was actually teaching cannibalism, or something to that effect. But that is hardly clear or the case!

It may simply have been because the Law of Moses forbade drinking blood. Or perhaps those disciples couldn't handle the level of criticism that would come on them in wake of this controversy.

Or perhaps they couldn't handle Jesus being so intimate with them? Perhaps they were looking for a Leader (Messianic warrior) rather than a Lover?

So this, too, fails flat.

If anyone has any other arguments, I'll be happy to hear them. I don't think, however, that I'll change my mind....

[onewithhim]

... I regard the view it is real blood and flesh we eat as resacrificing Christ. ..

Is there any Biblical support for that?

Hebrews 6:4-6

Sorry, I don't see how that supports your idea.

For it is impossible for those being once enlightened, and having tasted of the heavenly gift, and becoming sharers of the Holy Spirit, and tasting the good Word of God, and the works of power of a coming age, then falling away, it is impossible for them again to renew to repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open shame.
Hebrews 6:4-6

Didn't you ask where in the Bible is there any evidence of people "crucifying again for themselves the Son of God"? Making the repeated celebration of ingesting Christ's body tantamount to crucifying him repeatedly?

[1213]

... I regard the view it is real blood and flesh we eat as resacrificing Christ. ..

Is there any Biblical support for that?

Hebrews 6:4-6

Sorry, I don't see how that supports your idea.

For it is impossible for those being once enlightened, and having tasted of the heavenly gift, and becoming sharers of the Holy Spirit, and tasting the good Word of God, and the works of power of a coming age, then falling away, it is impossible for them again to renew to repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open shame.
Hebrews 6:4-6

Didn't you ask where in the Bible is there any evidence of people "crucifying again for themselves the Son of God"? Making the repeated celebration of ingesting Christ's body tantamount to crucifying him repeatedly?

I asked is there Biblical support for the idea that in Eucharist people are resacrificing Christ. I don't think the scripture you gave says so. The scripture seems to say, if person rejects the gift he once received, it is impossible for them to crucify Jesus again for being saved.

[onewithhim]

... I regard the view it is real blood and flesh we eat as resacrificing Christ. ..

Is there any Biblical support for that?

Hebrews 6:4-6

Sorry, I don't see how that supports your idea.

For it is impossible for those being once enlightened, and having tasted of the heavenly gift, and becoming sharers of the Holy Spirit, and tasting the good Word of God, and the works of power of a coming age, then falling away, it is impossible for them again to renew to repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open shame.
Hebrews 6:4-6

Didn't you ask where in the Bible is there any evidence of people "crucifying again for themselves the Son of God"? Making the repeated celebration of ingesting Christ's body tantamount to crucifying him repeatedly?

I asked is there Biblical support for the idea that in Eucharist people are resacrificing Christ. I don't think the scripture you gave says so. The scripture seems to say, if person rejects the gift he once received, it is impossible for them to crucify Jesus again for being saved.

It says that if one goes back to the world, they are crucifying Jesus all over again when they celebrate the ingesting of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist. Is that not a good example?

[1213]

... I regard the view it is real blood and flesh we eat as resacrificing Christ. ..

Is there any Biblical support for that?

Hebrews 6:4-6

Sorry, I don't see how that supports your idea.

For it is impossible for those being once enlightened, and having tasted of the heavenly gift, and becoming sharers of the Holy Spirit, and tasting the good Word of God, and the works of power of a coming age, then falling away, it is impossible for them again to renew to repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open shame.
Hebrews 6:4-6

Didn't you ask where in the Bible is there any evidence of people "crucifying again for themselves the Son of God"? Making the repeated celebration of ingesting Christ's body tantamount to crucifying him repeatedly?

I asked is there Biblical support for the idea that in Eucharist people are resacrificing Christ. I don't think the scripture you gave says so. The scripture seems to say, if person rejects the gift he once received, it is impossible for them to crucify Jesus again for being saved.

It says that if one goes back to the world, they are crucifying Jesus all over again when they celebrate the ingesting of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist. Is that not a good example?

Sorry, I don't see at all how this would be referring to Eucharist. Please explain how do you come to that conclusion?

For it is impossible for those being once enlightened, and having tasted of the heavenly gift, and becoming sharers of the Holy Spirit, and tasting the good Word of God, and the works of power of a coming age, then falling away, it is impossible for them again to renew to repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open shame.
Hebrews 6:4-6

[onewithhim]

... I regard the view it is real blood and flesh we eat as resacrificing Christ. ..

Is there any Biblical support for that?

Hebrews 6:4-6

Sorry, I don't see how that supports your idea.

For it is impossible for those being once enlightened, and having tasted of the heavenly gift, and becoming sharers of the Holy Spirit, and tasting the good Word of God, and the works of power of a coming age, then falling away, it is impossible for them again to renew to repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open shame.
Hebrews 6:4-6

Didn't you ask where in the Bible is there any evidence of people "crucifying again for themselves the Son of God"? Making the repeated celebration of ingesting Christ's body tantamount to crucifying him repeatedly?

I asked is there Biblical support for the idea that in Eucharist people are resacrificing Christ. I don't think the scripture you gave says so. The scripture seems to say, if person rejects the gift he once received, it is impossible for them to crucify Jesus again for being saved.

It says that if one goes back to the world, they are crucifying Jesus all over again when they celebrate the ingesting of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist. Is that not a good example?

Sorry, I don't see at all how this would be referring to Eucharist. Please explain how do you come to that conclusion?

For it is impossible for those being once enlightened, and having tasted of the heavenly gift, and becoming sharers of the Holy Spirit, and tasting the good Word of God, and the works of power of a coming age, then falling away, it is impossible for them again to renew to repentance, crucifying again for themselves the Son of God, and putting Him to open shame.
Hebrews 6:4-6

I have tried to explain it. You asked if there was any example of people crucifying Christ anew and I gave you the above example.

[Wootah]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #15]

I don't think Hebrews 6:4-6 directly apply to the Eucharist being considered the real flesh and blood of Jesus.

Hebrews 6:4-6 is saying that there is only one way to salvation: Jesus. If we keep acting like new Christians committing the same sins over and over its like we are rejecting that final atoning sacrifice and sacrificing Jesus over and over again and shaming Jesus's atoning work. Rather let's become like a land that drinks in the word of God and produces a large crop than a land that produces thorns and thistles.

[historia]

I regard the view it is real blood and flesh we eat as resacrificing Christ. Happy to hear rebuttals to that.

Perhaps you can tell us why you think the doctrine of the Real Presence entails "re-sacrificing" Christ.

[Wootah]

I regard the view it is real blood and flesh we eat as resacrificing Christ. Happy to hear rebuttals to that.

Perhaps you can tell us why you think the doctrine of the Real Presence entails "re-sacrificing" Christ.

Well in fairness I could argue against it but it seems like Christ's sacrifice is not once for all but everytime there is communion.

[historia]

I regard the view it is real blood and flesh we eat as resacrificing Christ. Happy to hear rebuttals to that.

Perhaps you can tell us why you think the doctrine of the Real Presence entails "re-sacrificing" Christ.

Well in fairness I could argue against it but it seems like Christ's sacrifice is not once for all but everytime there is communion.

Why does it seem that way to you?

[Wootah]

[Replying to historia in post #19]

Well in the OT system a new bull or whatever was really killed and it's real flesh and blood paid for sins temporarily.

So it could be seen that the claim of eating Jesus real flesh and blood, broken for you, is similarly making Jesus die all over again rather that a symbolic gesture to remember.