OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 27, 2014, 11:08:26 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Eucharist : Roman Catholic view Vs. Eastern Orthodox view  (Read 3506 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« on: September 17, 2012, 06:24:20 AM »

Like the Roman Catholic Church's transubstantiation, the Eastern Orthodox Church believes that the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Jesus at consecration.

In the EOC, is it believed to be the actual body and blood, or it is spiritually the body and blood or just symbolizes the body and blood of Jesus? Which view is correct?

The RCC calls this "Transubstantiation". What does the EOC call this?

And, are the consecration results exactly the same in both the RCC and the EOC? If not, what is the difference?
« Last Edit: September 17, 2012, 06:28:12 AM by kx9 » Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2012, 07:34:03 AM »

Quote
In the EOC, is it believed to be the actual body and blood, or it is spiritually the body and blood or just symbolizes the body and blood of Jesus? Which view is correct?
We believe the Eucharist is the body and blood of the Lord. We dont try to go deeper than that. The way my priest told me was, "We dont have to put it in a box, label it, and understand it. It just is."

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
soderquj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOAA, Metropolis of Denver
Posts: 236



WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 17, 2012, 08:27:31 AM »

^this

It is both, a mystery, "It just is".

The other thing for Eastern Orthodox is that the Eucharist is for eating not to be worshiped.  I believe Roman Catholics have adoration chapels where they worship the gifts.
Logged

O God, cleanse me a sinner and have mercy on me.
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2012, 09:25:26 AM »

^this

It is both, a mystery, "It just is".

The other thing for Eastern Orthodox is that the Eucharist is for eating not to be worshiped.  I believe Roman Catholics have adoration chapels where they worship the gifts.

Does the EO consider this to be idolatry?  I know in Scripture St. Stephen accused the Jews of idolatry for trying to contain God and His Messiah in the temple and within the bounds of the Law.  God cannot be contained by the temple and the law.  By the same measure, while the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ, can we say it is wrong to direct worship towards it?  Or is it okay?
Logged
soderquj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOAA, Metropolis of Denver
Posts: 236



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2012, 09:44:33 AM »

^this

It is both, a mystery, "It just is".

The other thing for Eastern Orthodox is that the Eucharist is for eating not to be worshiped.  I believe Roman Catholics have adoration chapels where they worship the gifts.

Does the EO consider this to be idolatry?  I know in Scripture St. Stephen accused the Jews of idolatry for trying to contain God and His Messiah in the temple and within the bounds of the Law.  God cannot be contained by the temple and the law.  By the same measure, while the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ, can we say it is wrong to direct worship towards it?  Or is it okay?

I do not know if we would call it Idolatry, I do not know if is it treated as an Idol?  

During Presanctified the priest enter the Nave with his head covered as the Presanctified Holy Gifts are a better representation of Christ. While the Priest and Deacon carry the Presanctified Holy Gifts, they say quietly “Through the prayer of our holy Fathers…”, the people kneel and bow with their faces to the ground. This acknowledges that the gifts are already the body and blood from the DL the Sunday before. But again we are told it is for eating not worship. EO do not pray to the Eucharist.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2012, 09:46:23 AM by soderquj » Logged

O God, cleanse me a sinner and have mercy on me.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 17, 2012, 09:45:51 AM »

Quote
Does the EO consider this to be idolatry?
I dont think so. I just personally find it misguided, but a natural evolution of things based on how Roman Catholics innovate and try to make things more than what they are.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,812


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2012, 09:56:24 AM »

From my understanding over the years, the differences in our understanding of the meaning and nature of the Eucharist are subtle and are not among the church-dividing issues which divide us on this earthly journey.
Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #7 on: September 17, 2012, 11:04:30 AM »

In the EOC, is it believed to be the actual body and blood, or it is spiritually the body and blood or... symbolizes the body and blood of Jesus?

All three.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,416


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #8 on: September 17, 2012, 12:46:25 PM »

In the EOC, is it believed to be the actual body and blood, or it is spiritually the body and blood or... symbolizes the body and blood of Jesus?

All three.

I've learned differently so please correct me if I'm wrong.

I've learned the Eucharist IS 100% the body and blood of Christ.  The bread IS his flesh, the wine & water IS his blood.   When you partake in the Eucharist you are consuming the actual BODY and BLOOD of Christ (yes the actual flesh).   I have not heard of it being anything symbolic Huh
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,626



« Reply #9 on: September 17, 2012, 01:09:00 PM »

In the EOC, is it believed to be the actual body and blood, or it is spiritually the body and blood or... symbolizes the body and blood of Jesus?

All three.

I've learned differently so please correct me if I'm wrong.

I've learned the Eucharist IS 100% the body and blood of Christ.  The bread IS his flesh, the wine & water IS his blood.   When you partake in the Eucharist you are consuming the actual BODY and BLOOD of Christ (yes the actual flesh).   I have not heard of it being anything symbolic Huh


None of those things are mutually exclusive.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #10 on: September 17, 2012, 01:47:43 PM »

The Eucharist is shown to be the true body and blood of Christ.

It is the glorified Spirit-animated Flesh and Blood of the risen Christ [1 Corinthians 15].

It is the Symbol which re-presents (the) History (of salvation), recapitulated in the life of Christ; the Life is in the Blood.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2012, 01:49:29 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
akimel
Fr Aidan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR (Western Rite)
Posts: 520



WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 17, 2012, 10:11:43 PM »

When the priest processes with the Holy Gifts during the Liturgy of the Pre-sanctified, we prostrate ourselves before the Eucharistic Christ and adore him.  As St Nicholas Cabasilas notes, this act is qualitatively different from the veneration offered to the oblations at the Great Entrance or to the icon of our Lord: it is true adoration.  We typically do not offer services of adoration outside the Liturgy, but within the Liturgy we do not hesitate to adore and pray to the Body and Blood of Christ.             
Logged

kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #12 on: September 18, 2012, 01:36:43 PM »

The Eucharist is shown to be the true body and blood of Christ.
I believe it is spiritual, since Jesus went [physically] back to the Father and he will return [physically] in the future to defeat the Antichrist.

Matthew 28:20
and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

So Jesus is spiritually with us. In the same way He is spiritually present in the Eucharist.

Quote
It is the glorified Spirit-animated Flesh and Blood of the risen Christ [1 Corinthians 15].
Can you please be more specific as to which verse.
Logged
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #13 on: September 18, 2012, 01:39:11 PM »

When the priest processes with the Holy Gifts during the Liturgy of the Pre-sanctified, we prostrate ourselves before the Eucharistic Christ and adore him.  As St Nicholas Cabasilas notes, this act is qualitatively different from the veneration offered to the oblations at the Great Entrance or to the icon of our Lord: it is true adoration.  We typically do not offer services of adoration outside the Liturgy, but within the Liturgy we do not hesitate to adore and pray to the Body and Blood of Christ.             

Do Eastern Orthodoxy view the terms [worship] and [adoration] as having the same meaning or differently when it is related to the Eucharist?
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #14 on: September 18, 2012, 01:53:08 PM »

I believe it is spiritual, since Jesus went [physically] back to the Father and he will return [physically] in the future to defeat the Antichrist.

Matthew 28:20
and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

So Jesus is spiritually with us. In the same way He is spiritually present in the Eucharist.

He is physically present in the Eucharist.  At the Road to Emmaus, Jesus consecrated the bread and then disappeared.

Also your understanding of "physically" is incorrect.  As shown after the Resurrection, Jesus just shows up and disappears at will, even through locked doors.  And John 6 also states that Jesus said that his flesh is food indeed.  His flesh, not his spirit.
Logged
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #15 on: September 18, 2012, 02:25:04 PM »

I believe it is spiritual, since Jesus went [physically] back to the Father and he will return [physically] in the future to defeat the Antichrist.

Matthew 28:20
and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

So Jesus is spiritually with us. In the same way He is spiritually present in the Eucharist.

He is physically present in the Eucharist.  At the Road to Emmaus, Jesus consecrated the bread and then disappeared.
He just broke bread and disappeared. He did not celebrate Holy Mass/Divine Liturgy before breaking the bread.

One more thing to note is that Jesus did not disappear at the Last Supper after He said "This is my body" "This is my blood"


Quote
Also your understanding of "physically" is incorrect.  As shown after the Resurrection, Jesus just shows up and disappears at will, even through locked doors.  And John 6 also states that Jesus said that his flesh is food indeed.  His flesh, not his spirit.
Jesus was resurrected in the same physical body which was glorified. So yes, His physical body had such powers to appear and disappear at will.

One question, having having received the Eucharist the first time, do you have eternal life right now?
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 02:34:06 PM by kx9 » Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #16 on: September 18, 2012, 03:01:04 PM »

He just broke bread and disappeared. He did not celebrate Holy Mass/Divine Liturgy before breaking the bread.

On the contrary, he spoke to the two disciples about Scripture on the road.  And then at the end they celebrated the Eucharist.  This is why we have today the Liturgy of the Word (or Liturgy of the Catechumen) and the Liturgy of the Eucharist (or Liturgy of the Faithful).  Emmaus actually is the primordial Liturgy which then set the structure of the Liturgies we have today.

One more thing to note is that Jesus did not disappear at the Last Supper after He said "This is my body" "This is my blood"

He was still fulfilling the entire Passion over the next few days.


Jesus was resurrected in the same physical body which was glorified. So yes, His physical body had such powers to appear and disappear at will.

And he has the power to multiply the loaves as shown in the feeding of the 5000.

One question, having having received the Eucharist the first time, do you have eternal life right now?

"Eternal" and "now" is an oxymoron.
Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #17 on: September 18, 2012, 03:26:47 PM »

The Eucharist is shown to be the true body and blood of Christ.
I believe it is spiritual, since Jesus went [physically] back to the Father and he will return [physically] in the future to defeat the Antichrist.

Matthew 28:20
and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

So Jesus is spiritually with us. In the same way He is spiritually present in the Eucharist.

Quote
It is the glorified Spirit-animated Flesh and Blood of the risen Christ [1 Corinthians 15].
Can you please be more specific as to which verse.

KX9,

I don't believe that a distinction between "physical" and "spiritual" is a very healthy way for a Christian to think. There are physical things, and there are non-physical things; some are Spiritual, some are carnal. The Holy Spirit is non-physical and Spiritual, but the risen body of the Resurrection is physical and also Spiritual. Satan and the demons are non-physical but carnal. An incarnate life lived to God is Spiritual. What do we mean when we say spiritual?

A life lived according to the Holy Spirit.

Something related to the Spirit of God working in the world.

In relation to your human spirit, which is currently incarnate because you are a material being.

Bodiless powers like Angels and Demons? I think we only really mean that when we're talking about the spiritual world/realm, I.E. the existence of disembodied spirits. To quote a wise man here, I cannot recall whom: God the Father is Spirit, but he is not "a spirit".

Now, regarding 1:Corinthians 15, I was referring to the following verses:

"So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So also it is written, 'The first MAN, Adam, BECAME A LIVING SOUL.' The last Adam became a life-giving Spirit."

It is important to know that the English translations "natural body" and "spiritual body" are exceedingly poor. The word used for "natural" is "psyche", which means soul; it is a translation of the Hebrew word "nephesh", which is what God makes the first Adam when he is created ('the first Adam became a living soul'). Thus, this "soulish existence" is the manner in which a fallen human body exists; an existence which, as you and I know well, is quite physical.

"Spiritual body" could perhaps be better dynamically translated "Spirit-animated" or "Spiritualized" body. This body is not dis-incarnate or immaterial because of its relation to the spiritual realm. Rather, this body exists in a new mode of existence defined, sustained, and constituted from the Holy Spirit of God. It is this manner of existence which Christ gives to us when he gives us His Resurrected body as a prototype for our own, in Him. Therefore 1 Corinthians 15:44 could perhaps better be translated: "It is sown a Soulish Body, it is raised a Spiritualized Body."

If you would like to see a short related video, here is Anglican scholar N.T. Wright speaking briefly on the topic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jNaVgyqUD8

So we have seen that the Resurrected Body of Christ, which he ultimately shares with the totality of his Bride, is both Spiritualized and physical. So then, it is good to see also that this body, with its new mode of Spiritualized existence in the Coming Age of the Reign of Heaven which is already at hand, does not relate to reality in the same way that Soulish flesh does.

Christ's spiritualized flesh can be broken, but not divided. Remember, even before His Ascension, Christ stood somehow at the very tabernacle of heaven making atonement for the world, and one cannot say that he did this without his body, because he was Incarnate once for all, completely, for the Salvation of the World. Christ is not part incarnate; the Logos is not floating around somewhere with a little man Jesus occupying some of His time. This is a form of Docetism condemned by almost every major Christian denomination. Even the early Messianic Adoptionists didn't think some ghost Jesus was floating around apart from Jesus.

We believe that when we gather as Church to offer our bodies broken and our blood shed to God through Christ's, that we *really* enter into the heavenly altar and receive Christ's once-for-all atonement. Here we receive it in the only manner that an incarnate world could: bread to flesh, blood to body. This is the Christian faith as we understand it.

Quote
One question, having having received the Eucharist the first time, do you have eternal life right now?

Yes. We believe this is the quintessential work of belief through which all of our charity, suffering, faith and love are recapitulated in Christ. As he said: "I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believes in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever lives and believes in me shall never die." and "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

Hopefully this has been somehow helpful to you.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 03:29:31 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #18 on: September 18, 2012, 03:30:14 PM »

On the contrary, he spoke to the two disciples about Scripture on the road.  And then at the end they celebrated the Eucharist.  This is why we have today the Liturgy of the Word (or Liturgy of the Catechumen) and the Liturgy of the Eucharist (or Liturgy of the Faithful).  Emmaus actually is the primordial Liturgy which then set the structure of the Liturgies we have today.


You are the first person I have heard claiming that this passage is also referring Holy Mass/Divine Liturgy.

So far I haven't heard of a Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox interpreting this passage as celebrating of the Eucharist. One more important point is that no wine (blood) is mentioned in these passages. So what makes you think it is referring to Holy Mass/Divine Liturgy?

One more thing, as an Eastern Catholic, is your Church in communion with the Vatican?

One more thing to note is that Jesus did not disappear at the Last Supper after He said "This is my body" "This is my blood"

Quote
He was still fulfilling the entire Passion over the next few days.
This is unclear. Please be more specific.

Jesus was resurrected in the same physical body which was glorified. So yes, His physical body had such powers to appear and disappear at will.

Quote
And he has the power to multiply the loaves as shown in the feeding of the 5000.
True, but this is irrelevant to the OP.

One question, having having received the Eucharist the first time, do you have eternal life right now?

Quote
"Eternal" and "now" is an oxymoron.
So are you denying what Jesus said? It is very simple and clear : John 6:54

John 6:54
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

If you believe that Jesus is speaking literally, then you have eternal life, otherwise you are rejecting what He has said.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 03:33:07 PM by kx9 » Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #19 on: September 18, 2012, 03:52:04 PM »

One more thing, as an Eastern Catholic, is your Church in communion with the Vatican?
Yeah, he's part of that communion.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #20 on: September 18, 2012, 03:55:11 PM »

The Eucharist is shown to be the true body and blood of Christ.
I believe it is spiritual, since Jesus went [physically] back to the Father and he will return [physically] in the future to defeat the Antichrist.

Matthew 28:20
and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

So Jesus is spiritually with us. In the same way He is spiritually present in the Eucharist.

Quote
It is the glorified Spirit-animated Flesh and Blood of the risen Christ [1 Corinthians 15].
Can you please be more specific as to which verse.

KX9,

I don't believe that a distinction between "physical" and "spiritual" is a very healthy way for a Christian to think. There are physical things, and there are non-physical things; some are Spiritual, some are carnal. The Holy Spirit is non-physical and Spiritual, but the risen body of the Resurrection is physical and also Spiritual. Satan and the demons are non-physical but carnal. An incarnate life lived to God is Spiritual. What do we mean when we say spiritual?

A life lived according to the Holy Spirit.

Something related to the Spirit of God working in the world.

In relation to your human spirit, which is currently incarnate because you are a material being.

Bodiless powers like Angels and Demons? I think we only really mean that when we're talking about the spiritual world/realm, I.E. the existence of disembodied spirits. To quote a wise man here, I cannot recall whom: God the Father is Spirit, but he is not "a spirit".

Now, regarding 1:Corinthians 15, I was referring to the following verses:

"So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So also it is written, 'The first MAN, Adam, BECAME A LIVING SOUL.' The last Adam became a life-giving Spirit."

It is important to know that the English translations "natural body" and "spiritual body" are exceedingly poor. The word used for "natural" is "psyche", which means soul; it is a translation of the Hebrew word "nephesh", which is what God makes the first Adam when he is created ('the first Adam became a living soul'). Thus, this "soulish existence" is the manner in which a fallen human body exists; an existence which, as you and I know well, is quite physical.

"Spiritual body" could perhaps be better dynamically translated "Spirit-animated" or "Spiritualized" body. This body is not dis-incarnate or immaterial because of its relation to the spiritual realm. Rather, this body exists in a new mode of existence defined, sustained, and constituted from the Holy Spirit of God. It is this manner of existence which Christ gives to us when he gives us His Resurrected body as a prototype for our own, in Him. Therefore 1 Corinthians 15:44 could perhaps better be translated: "It is sown a Soulish Body, it is raised a Spiritualized Body."

If you would like to see a short related video, here is Anglican scholar N.T. Wright speaking briefly on the topic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jNaVgyqUD8

So we have seen that the Resurrected Body of Christ, which he ultimately shares with the totality of his Bride, is both Spiritualized and physical. So then, it is good to see also that this body, with its new mode of Spiritualized existence in the Coming Age of the Reign of Heaven which is already at hand, does not relate to reality in the same way that Soulish flesh does.

Christ's spiritualized flesh can be broken, but not divided. Remember, even before His Ascension, Christ stood somehow at the very tabernacle of heaven making atonement for the world, and one cannot say that he did this without his body, because he was Incarnate once for all, completely, for the Salvation of the World. Christ is not part incarnate; the Logos is not floating around somewhere with a little man Jesus occupying some of His time. This is a form of Docetism condemned by almost every major Christian denomination. Even the early Messianic Adoptionists didn't think some ghost Jesus was floating around apart from Jesus.

We believe that when we gather as Church to offer our bodies broken and our blood shed to God through Christ's, that we *really* enter into the heavenly altar and receive Christ's once-for-all atonement. Here we receive it in the only manner that an incarnate world could: bread to flesh, blood to body. This is the Christian faith as we understand it.

Your post is a bit hard to understand, as no other Christian has come up with such a viewpoint regarding "spiritual" before, nevertheless your post was informative. I will try and obtain more information regarding this from some other websites.


Quote
One question, having having received the Eucharist the first time, do you have eternal life right now?

Quote
Yes. We believe this is the quintessential work of belief through which all of our charity, suffering, faith and love are recapitulated in Christ. As he said: "I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believes in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever lives and believes in me shall never die." and "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

Hopefully this has been somehow helpful to you.

Hmm... like some Protestant denominations, Do the EOC teach/believe that a person's salvation cannot be lost?

P.S : May I ask what "Supporter of OCA Cynocephaly" and "Protokentarchos" (below your username next to your posts) mean?
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 03:56:34 PM by kx9 » Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,819


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #21 on: September 18, 2012, 03:59:06 PM »

Cynokephaly means dog-headedness. I think it's a wordplay on autocephaly.
Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #22 on: September 18, 2012, 04:00:30 PM »

Hmm... like some Protestant denominations, Do the EOC teach/believe that a person's salvation cannot be lost?

No.

Quote
P.S : May I ask what "Supporter of OCA Cynocephaly" and "Protokentarchos" (below your username next to your posts) mean?

The first is a joke of mine. In some obscure folk legends, St. Christopher had the head of a dog (cynocephalus). "Autocephaly" is when a local church governs itself. So the joke is the play on words and the implication that they would do well under St. Christopher's leadership.

"Protokentarchos" is a rank in the Eastern Roman military/government. A lot of people here find that history interesting, and so the moderators on this forum made it so that you "go up a rank" as you hit certain numbers of posts. It doesn't have any religious significance and is just for fun.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #23 on: September 18, 2012, 04:02:27 PM »

no other Christian has come up with such a viewpoint regarding "spiritual" before
You'll find that many have, especially in the EOC and, as I pointed out, among certain people in other denominations like N.T. Wright.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 04:02:35 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #24 on: September 18, 2012, 04:15:28 PM »


Quote
No.
I see this as a rejection of what Jesus said in John 6:54
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

Eternal life is a gift which cannot be taken away. Since you believe that Jesus was speaking literally and you have received the Eucharist, you have eternal life and that cannot be lost.

Jesus was speaking spiritually, as He has explained this to his disciples later as recorded in John 6:63.
John 6:63
The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.



Does the EOC believe the Eucharist is a sacrifice (made present again and again everyday) like Roman Catholics believe?

Quote
The first is a joke of mine. In some obscure folk legends, St. Christopher had the head of a dog (cynocephalus). "Autocephaly" is when a local church governs itself. So the joke is the play on words and the implication that they would do well under St. Christopher's leadership.

Quote
"Protokentarchos" is a rank in the Eastern Roman military/government. A lot of people here find that history interesting, and so the moderators on this forum made it so that you "go up a rank" as you hit certain numbers of posts. It doesn't have any religious significance and is just for fun.
Nice info Smiley May I have the complete list of rankings on this forum and their meanings?
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 04:26:03 PM by kx9 » Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,402


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #25 on: September 18, 2012, 04:30:09 PM »



I see this as a rejection of what Jesus said in John 6:54
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.


Does the EOC believe the Eucharist is a sacrifice (made present again and again everyday) like Roman Catholics believe?


I think you forgot about the bold part.

Edit: To clarify, the Eternal Life will be in the World to Come, not this world.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 04:33:05 PM by sheenj » Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #26 on: September 18, 2012, 04:33:48 PM »

Eternal life is a gift which cannot be taken away. Since you believe that Jesus was speaking literally and you have received the Eucharist, you have eternal life and that cannot be lost.
You're right. It cannot be lost or taken away. But it can be thrown away. God gives us free will 'till the end.

"For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, 'A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT,' and, 'A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire."

The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.
Yes, he was speaking Spiritually, that is, in and by the Holy Spirit. And the Soulish, corruptible flesh of this fallen age is sewn with the seed of death and must be denied until the very end.

But not flesh in any sense of the word, for our same Lord said to his disciples: "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."

Does the EOC believe the Eucharist is a sacrifice (made present again and again everyday) like Roman Catholics believe?

No, if a "re-sacrifice" is meant.

We believe that the Eucharist is co-participation in the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ which he made on Calvary and at the Altar of Heaven. This is why those ancient Christians who speak a language similar to Christ's own language call the Liturgy "Qurbana", that is, Offering.

Quote
May I have the complete list of rankings on this forum and their meanings?
Not sure where to find that. Perhaps a moderator can help.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #27 on: September 18, 2012, 04:34:48 PM »

Edit: To clarify, the Eternal Life will be in the World to Come, not this world.
I disagree. We have eternal life now if we believe in the Son of Man because God's kingdom is already upon Christians, in power. AND We have eternal life when he raises us up on the last day.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #28 on: September 18, 2012, 04:51:42 PM »

Quote
Eternal life is a gift which cannot be taken away. Since you believe that Jesus was speaking literally and you have received the Eucharist, you have eternal life and that cannot be lost.
You're right. It cannot be lost or taken away. But it can be thrown away. God gives us free will 'till the end.
You're right. I agree with this.

The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.
Quote
Yes, he was speaking Spiritually, that is, in and by the Holy Spirit. And the Soulish, corruptible flesh of this fallen age is sewn with the seed of death and must be denied until the very end.
I agree with that too, but Catholicism denies that Jesus was speaking spiritually. They take Him literally.

According to some of the EO posters on this thread, it also appears that the EOC takes Jesus literally, so I am confused.

Quote
But not flesh in any sense of the word, for our same Lord said to his disciples: "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."
I disagree. It is flesh, it is "glorified flesh"

Does the EOC believe the Eucharist is a sacrifice (made present again and again everyday) like Roman Catholics believe?

Quote
No, if a "re-sacrifice" is meant.
At the Last Supper, Jesus told His disciples to do this in remembrance of Him. It is therefore a remembrance, not a sacrifice that must be repeated everyday.

Quote
We believe that the Eucharist is co-participation in the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ which he made on Calvary and at the Altar of Heaven. This is why those ancient Christians who speak a language similar to Christ's own language call the Liturgy "Qurbana", that is, Offering.
Agreed, but it can't be literal, it is the spiritual presence as Jesus said in John 6:63 :

John 6:63
The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.

Do you agree that the Eucharist is the Spiritual Presence of Jesus? The next only Physical presence of Jesus on Earth is when He will return to destroy the Antichrist in the future.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 04:53:02 PM by kx9 » Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #29 on: September 18, 2012, 05:28:22 PM »

You are the first person I have heard claiming that this passage is also referring Holy Mass/Divine Liturgy.

So far I haven't heard of a Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox interpreting this passage as celebrating of the Eucharist.

I learned this from the homily of an RC priest.  Makes sense too if you think about it.  That is how the Apostles did their Liturgies in the early days of the Church.  They went to the temple or synagogue to discuss Scripture, then go home to break bread.  Its not like they had all the rituals we have today which actually took over a millennium to develop.

One more important point is that no wine (blood) is mentioned in these passages. So what makes you think it is referring to Holy Mass/Divine Liturgy?

One more thing, as an Eastern Catholic, is your Church in communion with the Vatican?


Scripture doesn't mention everything.  It is written to make a point, not to get an accounting of every little bit.  It is not uncommon for them to have some wine travelling and especially they were supposed to go for supper.  Also the Eucharist also is the fullness of Christ.  I know this is RC theology but I do not think any Orthodox can argue againts it.  Christ is alive and therefore his flesh and body are not separate.


This is unclear. Please be more specific.


Christ still has to die and be resurrected.

True, but this is irrelevant to the OP.

I was responding to your statement.


So are you denying what Jesus said? It is very simple and clear : John 6:54

John 6:54
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

If you believe that Jesus is speaking literally, then you have eternal life, otherwise you are rejecting what He has said.

Where did I deny what Jesus said?  I just said that "now" and "eternal" are oxymorons.  Both refer to time, one being a specific point in time (now) and the other meaning timeless (eternity).  So if I have life for all eternity, does it matter if it is now or tomorrow or the day I die or the day I am resurrected?
Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #30 on: September 18, 2012, 07:23:15 PM »

I agree with that too, but Catholicism denies that Jesus was speaking spiritually. They take Him literally.
Spiritually vs. Literally? Do you mean, rather, "metaphorically" or "allegorically" rather than literally? Because there is nothing not-literal about the Spiritual.

Quote
But not flesh in any sense of the word, for our same Lord said to his disciples: "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."
I disagree. It is flesh, it is "glorified flesh"

I know it is flesh. When I said "not flesh in any sense of the word", I meant "it is not right to CONDEMN the flesh in every sense of the word 'flesh".

At the Last Supper, Jesus told His disciples to do this in remembrance of Him. It is therefore a remembrance, not a sacrifice that must be repeated everyday.
It is participation in a sacrifice which was once made. This participatory offering is called an Anemnesis Offering. It was foretold in the bread offered as showbread in Anemnesis. The word translated as "remembrance" is better translated "re-presentation", that is, you are not merely mentally recalling Christ's sacrifice, you are making it present at that moment.

The Epistle to the Hebrews contrasts the Anemnesis of the Old Covenant, which re-presented sin, with that of Christ, which re-presents the once-for-all atonement.


Do you agree that the Eucharist is the Spiritual Presence of Jesus?
I don't believe that Spiritual is the opposite of literal, or that Spiritual is the opposite of physical. That belief is more in line with the Baha'i faith, Manicheanism, etc. than Christianity.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 07:27:46 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,476


« Reply #31 on: September 19, 2012, 06:17:44 AM »

Nice info Smiley May I have the complete list of rankings on this forum and their meanings?

here
Logged
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #32 on: September 20, 2012, 12:36:47 PM »

Nice info Smiley May I have the complete list of rankings on this forum and their meanings?

here

Thanks Michal,

However, can you or someone explain the full meaning of these :

Archon           
Protokentarchos - (already explained : A rank in the Eastern Roman military/government)
Merarches
Taxiarches
Hoplitarches
Stratopedarches
Protostrator
Protospatharios
Tourmarches
Hypatos
Strategos
Domestikos tou thematos
Domestikos ton Scholon
Megas Domestikos
Exarchos
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,819


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #33 on: September 20, 2012, 12:41:22 PM »

They're all titles and honorifics from the Byzantine Empire. An Archon was a ruler, a strategos was a governor and an Exarchos was a ruler of a huge province (Italy and Africa had exarchs)
« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 12:41:32 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
Monk Vasyl
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: UOC of USA
Posts: 623


Monk Vasyl
WWW
« Reply #34 on: September 20, 2012, 01:00:01 PM »

In Luke 24:35:  King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
"And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread."

Sounds very liturgical to me.
Logged

The unworthy hierodeacon, Vasyl
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #35 on: September 20, 2012, 01:06:26 PM »

You are the first person I have heard claiming that this passage is also referring Holy Mass/Divine Liturgy.

So far I haven't heard of a Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox interpreting this passage as celebrating of the Eucharist.

Quote
I learned this from the homily of an RC priest.  Makes sense too if you think about it.  That is how the Apostles did their Liturgies in the early days of the Church.  They went to the temple or synagogue to discuss Scripture, then go home to break bread.  Its not like they had all the rituals we have today which actually took over a millennium to develop.

Let me hear about this from the EO... Do you EO people agree that Luke 24:13-35 was the celebrating of Divine Liturgy by the second time by Jesus?


Quote
Scripture doesn't mention everything.
It is a very common argument used by Roman Catholics (and maybe also EO) to argue that a particular practice can be biblical when it probably isn't.

However, whatever is in Scripture is all we need to know that we have Eternal life.

1 John 5:13
I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

John 20:31
But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Therefore there is no need for additional doctrines that are derived from Holy Tradition/Sacred Tradition. It all seems to put additional burden on the RC/EO with more than what is needed for salvation.


Quote
It is written to make a point, not to get an accounting of every little bit.  It is not uncommon for them to have some wine travelling and especially they were supposed to go for supper.  Also the Eucharist also is the fullness of Christ.  I know this is RC theology but I do not think any Orthodox can argue againts it.  Christ is alive and therefore his flesh and body are not separate.

Yes, Christ is alive, but he is physically at the right hand of the Father. He cannot be physically present everywhere, but He can be spiritually present everywhere.

[Flesh and body] are the same. Did you actually mean [Spirit and Flesh]?


This is unclear. Please be more specific.

Quote
Christ still has to die and be resurrected.
Quote
He was still fulfilling the entire Passion over the next few days.

Huh? So even after bearing our sins in His body on the cross [ONCE], he still had to continue the Passion??? ... This is unbiblical.



So are you denying what Jesus said? It is very simple and clear : John 6:54

John 6:54
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

If you believe that Jesus is speaking literally, then you have eternal life, otherwise you are rejecting what He has said.
Quote
Where did I deny what Jesus said?  I just said that "now" and "eternal" are oxymorons.  Both refer to time, one being a specific point in time (now) and the other meaning timeless (eternity).  So if I have life for all eternity, does it matter if it is now or tomorrow or the day I die or the day I am resurrected?
What did Jesus say :
John 6:54
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life...

But if he had said :
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood will have eternal life.... then it would agree with your statement. But he used [has] so you surely have eternal life. Do you agree with that?


« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 01:11:36 PM by kx9 » Logged
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #36 on: September 20, 2012, 01:09:34 PM »

They're all titles and honorifics from the Byzantine Empire. An Archon was a ruler, a strategos was a governor and an Exarchos was a ruler of a huge province (Italy and Africa had exarchs)

Please complete the list... Thanks.

EDIT : Oh, the list is already explained in that thread. That's enough there. Smiley
« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 01:13:22 PM by kx9 » Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,819


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #37 on: September 20, 2012, 01:28:35 PM »

Yes, Christ is alive, but he is physically at the right hand of the Father. He cannot be physically present everywhere, but He can be spiritually present everywhere.


What are you, a Jew? An atheist? I consider it blasphemous to say Christ cannot do something.

However, whatever is in Scripture is all we need to know that we have Eternal life.

1 John 5:13
I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

John 20:31
But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Actually, John uses the first person singular, so if you were consequent you would say the writings of John are enough for salvation.

« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 01:32:50 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #38 on: September 20, 2012, 01:50:22 PM »

Yes, Christ is alive, but he is physically at the right hand of the Father. He cannot be physically present everywhere, but He can be spiritually present everywhere.

Quote
What are you, a Jew? An atheist? I consider it blasphemous to say Christ cannot do something.

Check what is written about my faith next to my posts. I'm a Christian.

Some things are illogical. Can you say that God can create a [square circle] ? However if I have made a mistake, then I apologize. However let me make some quotes from scripture :

Acts 1:11
"Men of Galilee," they said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven."

This is true, and Jesus will return [physically] to defeat the antichrist. He lives in our hearts, and that is spiritual. He lives in us spiritually.

Galatians 2:20
I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

In this verse, this means that Jesus lives in us spiritually, not physically. How can one put a physical body in another physical body?

But, did not Jesus say in Matt. 28:18-20 that He would be with the disciples always, even to the ends of the earth?  Is this not a declaration that Jesus will be physically present everywhere?  No, this is not what is stated.

The answer is found in the teaching of the communicatio idiomatum.  This is the teaching that the attributes of both the divine and human nature are ascribed to the single person of Christ.  It does not mean, however, that anything particular to the divine nature was communicated to the human nature. Likewise, it does not mean that anything particular to the human nature was communicated to the divine nature.  It means that the attributes of the divine nature are claimed by the person of Christ.  Therefore, Jesus is omnipresent, not in His human nature, but in His divine nature.

Hope that clears things up.

However, whatever is in Scripture is all we need to know that we have Eternal life.

1 John 5:13
I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

John 20:31
But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Quote
Actually, John uses the first person singular, so if you were consequent you would say the writings of John are enough for salvation.
Yes that is what is needed for salvation [summarized].
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,819


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #39 on: September 20, 2012, 02:00:03 PM »

Yes, Christ is alive, but he is physically at the right hand of the Father. He cannot be physically present everywhere, but He can be spiritually present everywhere.


Quote
What are you, a Jew? An atheist? I consider it blasphemous to say Christ cannot do something.

Check what is written about my faith next to my posts. I'm a Christian.

Some things are illogical. Can you say that God can create a [square circle] ? However if I have made a mistake, then I apologize. However let me make some quotes from scripture :

God can do anything, however, human logic is imperfect.

Acts 1:11
"Men of Galilee," they said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven."


This is true, and Jesus will return [physically] to defeat the antichrist. He lives in our hearts, and that is spiritual. He lives in us spiritually.

I see no conflict here.

Galatians 2:20
I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

In this verse, this means that Jesus lives in us spiritually, not physically. How can one put a physical body in another physical body?

That doesn't follow from this verse at all. And you can put a physical body in another physical body by, you guessed it, eating it.

But, did not Jesus say in Matt. 28:18-20 that He would be with the disciples always, even to the ends of the earth?  Is this not a declaration that Jesus will be physically present everywhere?  No, this is not what is stated.

The answer is found in the teaching of the communicatio idiomatum.  This is the teaching that the attributes of both the divine and human nature are ascribed to the single person of Christ.  It does not mean, however, that anything particular to the divine nature was communicated to the human nature. Likewise, it does not mean that anything particular to the human nature was communicated to the divine nature.  It means that the attributes of the divine nature are claimed by the person of Christ.  Therefore, Jesus is omnipresent, not in His human nature, but in His divine nature.

Hope that clears things up.

It clears up that you're a nestorian.

Yes that is what is needed for salvation [summarized].

So the epistles of Paul and the other three gospels are "unnecessary burden for salvation" as well? Sola Joanno is a doctrine you invented?
« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 02:02:34 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #40 on: September 20, 2012, 02:14:40 PM »


Quote
I see no conflict here.
Then there is no need to call me a nestorian. I'm not one. There has probably been a case of misunderstanding.

Quote
That doesn't follow from this verse at all. And you can put a physical body in another physical body by, you guessed it, eating it.
Right, when we eat a physical body, it has to be dead first, or it dies after being eaten. If that is the case, then Christ is dead when He is in us... this is utter nonsense.

Quote
It clears up that you're a nestorian.
No I'm not a nestorian. As you said, human logic is imperfect. So I might have misunderstood. But looking forward to corrections from you.

God is something the human mind can never understand. No one can understand the Trinity [perfectly], but I believe and affirm it.


Quote
So the epistles of Paul and the other three gospels are "unnecessary burden for salvation" as well? Sola Joanno is a doctrine you invented?
No they are not. I'm saying that EO/RC traditions (from where additional doctrines are derived) is the "burden".

Sola Joanno... what does that mean? (Eastern Orthodoxy have some really unusual methods of naming stuff).
« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 02:20:18 PM by kx9 » Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,819


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #41 on: September 20, 2012, 02:21:25 PM »


Quote
Then there is no need to call me a nestorian.

I meant that there is no conflict between the quote and the fact that Christ is physically present in the Eucharist

Quote
It clears up that you're a nestorian.
No I'm not a nestorian. As you said, human logic is imperfect. So I might have misunderstood. But looking forward to corrections from you.

You said that Christ is present in one nature but not in the other. Seperating His natures like that is nestorianism. Question: Is Mary the Mother of God?

Quote
God is something the human mind can never understand. No one can understand the Trinity [perfectly], but I believe and affirm it.

In that you are right.


Quote
So the epistles of Paul and the other three gospels are "unnecessary burden for salvation" as well? Sola Joanno is a doctrine you invented?
No they are not. I'm saying that EO/RC traditions (from where additional doctrines are derived) is the "burden".

Sola Joanno... what does that mean? (Eastern Orthodoxy have some really unusual methods of naming stuff).

It's a word play on Sola Scriptura (By Scripture alone). Sola Joanne is by John alone in Latin, that's a name I gave to your doctrine that everything needed for salvation is contained "summarised" in the writings of the beloved disciple.

PS: Joanno was a typo, I meant Joanne

Right, when we eat a physical body, it has to be dead first, or it dies after being eaten. If that is the case, then Christ is dead when He is in us... this is utter nonsense.

Why are you trying to bring logic into this? Foolishness to the Greeks and all that. Be content to believe that the Eucharist is the bread of life. "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him."
« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 02:30:13 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #42 on: September 20, 2012, 03:03:46 PM »


Quote
Then there is no need to call me a nestorian.

I meant that there is no conflict between the quote and the fact that Christ is physically present in the Eucharist

Quote
It clears up that you're a nestorian.
No I'm not a nestorian. As you said, human logic is imperfect. So I might have misunderstood. But looking forward to corrections from you.

Quote
You said that Christ is present in one nature but not in the other. Seperating His natures like that is nestorianism. Question: Is Mary the Mother of God?
Yes, Mary is the Mother of God, but personally I prefer to use the term Theotokos rather than "Mother of God".


Quote
It's a word play on Sola Scriptura (By Scripture alone). Sola Joanne is by John alone in Latin, that's a name I gave to your doctrine that everything needed for salvation is contained "summarised" in the writings of the beloved disciple.

PS: Joanno was a typo, I meant Joanne

When we believe in Jesus, we have eternal life. Jesus has mentioned this in the Gospels. We are saved by faith by looking to Jesus's death on the Cross and His resurrection from the dead on the third day.

What else is needed for salvation according to Orthodox theology?


Right, when we eat a physical body, it has to be dead first, or it dies after being eaten. If that is the case, then Christ is dead when He is in us... this is utter nonsense.

Quote
Why are you trying to bring logic into this? Foolishness to the Greeks and all that. Be content to believe that the Eucharist is the bread of life. "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him."

Matthew 26:26-29
26 While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and [a]after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” 27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. 29 But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.”

First Jesus did not say "This becomes My Body". He said "This is My Body"

It is the same as Jesus spiritually saying "I am the door", "I am the true vine" or do you believe that Jesus is speaking literally?

John 10:9
9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.

John 15:1 "I am the true vine"

and in verse 29 of Matthew 26, Jesus calls it "fruit of the vine" not "blood" after consecration.

1 Cor 11:27
Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner
will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.

Why is it called "Bread" not "Body" or "Flesh" after consecration in 1 Cor 11:27 ?
« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 03:14:14 PM by kx9 » Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,068


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #43 on: September 20, 2012, 03:07:01 PM »

Why is it called "Bread" not "Body" after consecration in 1 Cor 11:27 ?

"This bread is my flesh".
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
kx9
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 213



« Reply #44 on: September 20, 2012, 03:11:58 PM »

Why is it called "Bread" not "Body" after consecration in 1 Cor 11:27 ?

"This bread is my flesh".

True, it is spiritually His Body.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 03:12:39 PM by kx9 » Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.202 seconds with 71 queries.