"This is my body which is ________ for you?"

From John Gill's Expositor:

he brake it; as a symbol of his body being wounded, bruised, and broken, through buffetings, scourgings, platting of a crown of thorns, which was put upon his head, and piercing his hands and feet with nails, and his side with a spear; for which reason the right of breaking the bread in this ordinance ought literally and strictly to be observed: Christ himself took the bread and brake it, denoting his willingness to lay down his life, to suffer and die in the room of his people; and this action of breaking the bread was used in order to be distributed, and that everyone might partake, as all the Israelites did at the passover, and not as these Corinthians at their ante-suppers, when one was full and another hungry; but Christ broke the bread, that everyone might have a part, as every believer may and ought, who may eat of this bread, and drink of the wine, and feed by faith on Christ, and take every blessing procured by him to themselves:

broken for you; for though a bone of him was not broken, but inasmuch as his skin and flesh were torn and broken by blows with rods and fists, by whippings and scourgings, by thorns, nails, and spear; and body and soul were torn asunder, or divided from each other by death; and death in Scripture is expressed by rbv, "breaking"; see #Jer 19:11 his body might be truly said to be broken, and that for his people; not merely to confirm his doctrine, or set an example of patience, or only for their good; but in their room and stead, as their surety and substitute:


Hint for DD: There is the difference, His body is not limited to the bones in His legs.

 

Can a body be broken without breaking any bones? yes.

Webster's 1828

break

5. To destroy, crush, weaken, or impair, as the human body or constitution.

 

No. I disagree and will call your rant a "red herring". I know the legs of my Saviour were not broken, so that tells me that figuratively His "body" being broken is that as the "Bread of Life"/Jesus Christ, just as He figuratively gave the example of the breaking of bread at suppertime with His disciples.

Now if you're just looking for some one to agree with you, Cranston and Orvie will be along shortly.

 

You all are trying to avoid the discrepancy.

What Paul said Christ said was not what Christ said.

Did Christ say he would be broken?
The real Question is
Which manuscript of Luke was Paul quoting from?
The same one that was included in the KJB, Or did Paul possibly have another version of Luke?

 

QS, you did you forget about me?

 

[attack against a member snipped]

[ February 21, 2004, 02:38 AM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob Griffin ]

 

Who said Paul was quoting? Yall? Besides, when was Paul ever there with Jesus and the disciples at the Last Supper ?

 

You do realize the Pharisees thought new sect that was led by Jesus was a cult don't you.

If standing for truth, I'm labeled as a cult member so be it.

As you remember, I've been called worse.
At least I won't have to apologize to God for slandering his words in the NIV.

Now back on topic, isn't it possible that Paul had another version of Luke when he wrote 1 Cor.

OOPS to answer my own post.
It would be impossible for Paul to have any version of Luke.
Luke was written in 63 to 68 AD
1 Cor. was written in 59 AD

See I'll admit when I'm wrong.

Back to the drawing board.

 

No. You still need to grow-up. You can't discern your right from your left, neither was Paul there to quote jesus , he only gave the essence of the account so stop wiht the junk, we've understood the passage quite well and have observed communion for many years in the process.

Another gnat in the life of camel swallowers.

 

I knew you'd come along soon, at least we agree that the Word of God is slandered in the niv now.

 

I see. He wasn't. So, according to you, he just "made it up." With this line of thought (the common Christian acceptance of Paul's writings as inspired) we can throw out most of the New Testament. </font>[/QUOTE]Go ahead since you insist, meanwhile, back at the farm....

 

Of course Christ said it. That's why it's in the Bible.

Perhaps:

This is my body which is broken and given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

This would have each scripture reporting a subset of Jesus's full words, not unlike the situation with the sign over the cross.

 

Where did Paul get his info?
Oral stories about the last supper, possibly.

And since Luke accompained Paul on trips.
He would have heard Paul preach this.

But why "given" in Luke and "broken" in 1 Cor.?
Maybe the correct english word doesn't matter as long as we have the Message.

Could be another plus for using differing versions.
Another example of differing words in the KJB relaying the same message.