Are the Reformation churches drifting into ecumenical extinction.

Yes but what is your churches explanation of this?

 

The communion symbolic of His death and shed blood on Cross for sins!

 

Agreed, only the church isn't reigning yet. That will have to wait till the millennial kingdom.

 

For all, for many, same difference perhaps? I don't know. Maybe it means for the many who come to the cross. My church believes and teaches Jesus came for all of humanity and it's up to the individual to accept his great sacrifice for the remission of their sins.

 

So you do not follow Gods laws as taught to us by Jesus Christ? For a Christian that would make no sense. It has nothing to do with the OT, nothing at all. Jesus freed us from the old way, we can come to the Father because of him, but there are still laws that we should obey, are there not?

 

As a Reformed Baptist I agree that Jesus came to preach to all humanity, but I would add that only the elect will accept his message to be reconciled with him. The rest will reject and scoff at such a proposal. Why would a rebel ever reconcile with a King to whom he doesn't want to be subject?

Adonia, does God just sit back, in complete passivity, and just wait to see which deity a person will pick? Does God just leave it to a human beings own will and never chooses to move a person to salvation?

 

I agree, think that God does indeed work to move people toward salvation, he gives us signs. But in the end it is the individual who needs to recognize those signs and act accordingly.

 

Of course God gives humanity signs. Paul tells us that we can know God exists by observing his creation.
But, is that all God does? Has he merely given signs and then he passively sits back to see if anyone will heed the signs?

I certainly think God is much more active than this.

If God is telling the truth in Ephesians 1 and He chooses to adopt humans, then it is clear he is active in creation when he tells us in Hebrews 12:7-8, "It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons."

I contend that God is very active in saving those who believe.

Hebrews 4:12-13 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

God calls some humans illegitimate while others he calls sons. How can that be, if God is not actively choosing?

 

But we are not celebrating the 'Passover Seder' meal, are we? We are celebrating the Lord's Supper If unleavened bread was used (and perhaps it was) i find it surprising that the appropriate Greek word is not used. However, we can be pretty sure that our Lord did not use wafers, and there is no possibility of the apostles supposing that the bread was really His body since that body was there right in front of them.

Thank you. I have wondered what it might be.

 

Yes, that would be true.

Are you kidding me? He just told them it was! I can imagine these men thinking to themselves: "Man, Jesus has led us on this incredible journey. We have seen him heal the infirm, make the blind see, walk on water, feed multitudes of people with a few loaves and fishes - we have even seen him raise the dead on occasion and now he is saying that the bread and wine are his body and blood? No problem. After all we have seen him do, him inhabiting 2 places at the same time would be child's play. We believe you Lord!."

And thus was the most holy sacrament instituted, and believed by all Christendom for century after century.

 

Possibly. Certain people can be hard headed and He will wait patiently for them - he did for me.

Your opinion is certainly accepted and respected.

Your opinion remains accepted and respected. God certainly desires all to be saved, the question remains how much time does he spend going after people. He has a lot of things on his plate you know.

 

Yes, just like when He said, "I am the gate for the sheep," they thought, "Yes! This means He's made out of wood and has five bars and a hinge." And when He said, "I am the true vine," they all clustered round Him and tried to pick grapes off Him!
I don't think so!

And thus was born (after 1200 years) the false doctrine that condemned countless thousands of Christians to death because they would not call a wafer 'God.' It would be a joke if it were not so sad.

 

So you think God just waited for you? Perhaps he was on vacation or was sleeping for awhile and you woke him up when you called. [emoji849]
Perhaps he had too much on his plate and was too busy to care about you. [emoji849]

 

Yes. God waited patiently for me, knowing that I need him more than he needs me, knowing I had no other place to go as I attempted to navigate this cold, cruel world. He allowed me to run as wild as a person could ever run on this earth and then He forgave me.

 

Look, we obviously have our own take on this issue. All I can say in reply that those things you mentioned were run of the mill parables when he was out preaching. But then we come to the most momentous thing to ever happen in his life and the life of the whole world and this time he would be dead on straight as to what he was talking about. He said what he meant, and meant what he said.

What could have ever been the most perfect memorial of him but himself. Memorials for other noted people have been made of wood, marble, copper, iron, steel and marble to name a few. But this memorial was going to be something completely different than anything that has ever been on this earth before, it was to be himself. His body, blood, soul and divinity truly present in the elements of bread and wine as orthodoxy so rightly teaches.

That's it! It is your prerogative not to believe this, but for those who do it is a great blessing.

 

I may be misreading you, but I think this basically amounts to an argument from silence. I don't think there's compelling argument from Ephesians 2:20 that Apostolic ministry has passed away. It's tentatively accepted that the Clement understood the ministry to be an enduring feature of the Church and he's first century. It certainly can be shown by the second.

 

You are entirely wrong here from start to finish here. Neither of 'those things' were parables, they were metaphors; neither of them were 'run of the mill' and only one of them could be described a preaching. John 15:1 was spoken at the Last Supper just as surely as Luke 22:19 etc.
Also, it's important to note that the Lord's Supper is an act of commemoration (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24-25). It is not a re-presentation. I believe it is more than that. In accord with the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, I believe that we feed upon Christ, not in a crass, carnal way, but in our hearts by faith (as did Augustine and others.

So no doubt you would be removing statues, icons and crucifixes of our Lord from your home and from your church? ;) But the memorial that our Lord desired, the joy that was set out before Him was the salvation of a vast crowd of believers. 'Here am I and the children whom God has given Me.' 'He shall His seed, He shall prolong His days; and the good pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand. He shall see the labour of His soul and be satisfied'

I am very blessed in what I believe, thank you.

 

Ephesians 2:20. '.....Having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone.' When do you put in the foundation of a building? Right at the start. How many foundations does a building need? Just the one.
That is really enough to clinch the matter, but in addition, the qualifications for an apostles, as given in Acts of the Apostles 1:21-22, were that they should have been with the Lord Jesus and seen the risen Christ (2 Peter 1:16; 1 John 1:1-3; 1 Corinthians 9:1; Galatians 1:11-12). And Paul describes himself as the last apostle (1 Corinthians 15:8).

 

You imagine God as passive and uncaring as he crossed his fingers in hopes that you would believe.
That goes entirely contrary to everything we know about God as revealed to us in scripture. I disagree entirely with your imagination.

Instead, I state that God drove you to the hopelessness you experienced. He hounded you to break your rebellious heart and remove your heart of stone and give you a new heart and a new spirit within you.

The God of the Bible is not some idle onlooker.

 

My mistake, I used the wrong word as you are correct they are indeed metaphors, but I stand by the rest of my statement.

Commemoration or memorial - nothing changes. I stand by the rest of my opinion.

My faith tradition says that it is a "re-presentation" done in an un-bloody manner, I believe them over what you are telling me. As for St. Augustine, according to the writer David Armstrong in a piece entitled "St. Augustines belief in the "Real Presence" he said: "The Eucharistic doctrine expounded by St. Augustine interpreted in a purely spiritual way by most Protestant writers on the history of dogmas. Despite his insistence on the symbolical explanation he does not exclude the Real Presence. In association with the words of institution he concurs with the older Church tradition in expressing belief in the Real Presence . . ."

St Augustine also wrote the following words:

He took flesh from the flesh of Mary . . . and gave us the same flesh to be eaten unto salvation . . . we do sin by not adoring. {Explanations of the Psalms, 98, 9; on p.20}

The Sacrifice of our times is the Body and Blood of the Priest Himself . . . Recognize then in the Bread what hung upon the tree; in the chalice what flowed from His side. {Sermo iii. 1-2; on p.62}

Eat Christ, then; though eaten He yet lives, for when slain He rose from the dead. Nor do we divide Him into parts when we eat Him: though indeed this is done in the Sacrament, as the faithful well know when they eat the Flesh of Christ, for each receives his part, hence are those parts called graces. Yet though thus eaten in parts He remains whole and entire; eaten in parts in the Sacrament, He remains whole and entire in Heaven. {Mai 129, 1; cf. Sermon 131; on p.65}

A cursory examination of the other Early Church Fathers shows similar conclusions of the "Real Presence".

Why would we do that? There is no sin in having a representation of those from the biblical age as long as said things are not the focus of worship themselves. We do of course continue to worship Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist because of his Real Presence within it.

I see, so the several Last Supper biblical verses mean nothing?

That is good, we both seem to agree on our respective blessings of belief.