Leave a Reply

Text formatting is available via select .

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> 


  1. I’m terribly sorry! I unintentionally omitted some words from Matthew 26.26. It reads, “Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples,’ I omitted three most important word, “Jesus took bread,”

    • Tonight begins Yom Kippur The day of Atonement. It is a day to take a rest from all the rushing about and the laborious work many must do. We have time to ponder our failures, our transgressions, the moments when we thought about being disloyal to our Father in Heaven and sins. We can look our selves square in the eye, see what our Father sees and be thankful for the atonement he accomplished with his only begotten. Hallelujah! I am glad to be free.

  2. Matthew 26:26-28 says, “Now as they were eating,(the Passover Meal), and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat, this is My body.” And He took a cup, and when He had given thanks He gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgivenss of sins.”
    “For the forgiveness of sins.” Christ’s death absolved the world of its sin; the Sacrament applies that forgiveness to individual communicants. See Isaiah 1:23; Jeremiah 31.34. Where there is reconciliation there is remission of sins. And what is that but justification? The bread, Body of Christ, and the wine, Blood of Christ forgives us of our sins. What a wonderful, awesome, gift of Christ, the Holy Sacrament of Christ, to be received for “the forgiveness of sins.” This is far more than symbolic and a mystery. This sacrament, the Lord’s Supper is for the forgiveness of sins. Praise God and thank you Jesus”!!!!!!!

  3. Daniel, at the time of 1 Corinthians, everyone was still keeping the pre-Talmud Pesach, names were and still are attached to the cups but these are not substantive and reading the Luke passage more carefully obliges us to ask what exactly is the new covenant especially in light of the Tanakh and the letters. Corinthians only speaks of Pesach there is no Eucharist in the Bible. It was invented much later.

    The point here is: it is very difficult to escape our own contexts, especially in the west and read these scriptures as the Hebrew/Jewish texts that they were and to keep in mind that the only scripture Jesus and his disciples knew was the Tanakh [Old Testament].

  4. Murray, you may well be correct but I think that is for Fred to say. I look forward to reading what he has to say on this aspect of his paper. I wonder what you think about my own larger points regarding Jesus the Jew and that Eucharist is a house built on sand. L’Chaim! apCaradog….

  5. Yes, my point was that to add the word “only” before the word “symbol” is a misreading of Fred’s paper.

  6. Murray, you might notice that Scott does not place “only Symbol and mystery” in quotes, you might also notice the three paras opening It is a mystery and the preceding para which speaks of symbol. L’Chaim

  7. Fred, thank you for your short essay on Passover/Pesach. It seems to me a standard Church understanding of how Pesach became Communion. Unfortunately, it does not accord with the facts as far as we can know them. First it is clear from Paul in Corinthians that he is describing Pesach and not Communion. Second, the Jerusalem church grew to 10,000 by the time the Temple was destroyed and they continued to keep the festivals especially Pesach. They went on with Pesach [without the visit to the Temple] for quite some time after the destruction. Jesus was a Jew who went to Synagogue, kept the Sabbath, did the Law, and kept all the Festivals, he was not inaugurating a new festival but saying nothing that was not being said by every other Jew in Jerusalem at that year’s Pesach. The study of hermeneutics and the history of the first four centuries is very instructive in this matter. You may say “Ahh but the Church….” and certainly Scott would say the same and you have to choose: trust the revealed Word of our Father or trust the opinions of Justin, Eusebius, Augustine, Jerome and Chrysostom among others. The latter three in particular were virulent in their attacks on the Jews along, with Constantine who wanted the Jews out of his Holy Church regarding them a contamination conveniently forgetting that Jesus and his apostles were Jews

    Scott, your line of thought is interesting but unfortunately your assumptions are incorrect so that your house is effectively built on sand, viz that Jesus was inaugurating Eucharist.

    You both may find it helpful to read a small book (a collection of lectures delivered in Upsala and then America) by Dom Gregory Dix an English Anglican academic: “Jew and Greek (A study in the primitive Church)”. He is the author also of “The Shape of Liturgy”. I would argue with much he writes but he successfully washes away the house built on sand. Read the first para of the Foreword and go directly to Ch 4 page 99 last para and read through to page 109. He describes how and why the Eucharist was invented and gives his reasons for it.

    May our Father keep you both close to Him. L’Chaim! apCaradog

    • Jesus took the cup, the third cup during the traditional passover Seder is call the “cup of redemption”, and said something totally new: ” and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. ” 1 Corinthians 11:24-26

      Jesus used the cup and the bread of the traditional Seder meal and announced that they are now to be reminders of the New Covenant. As he frequently taught his disciples, Jesus took traditional beliefs and revealed there “fulfilled” or “real” meaning. It can be very meaningful for believers to experience the Passover Seder and include the New Covenant reminder that Jesus body was broken and his blood poured out. This is the New Covenant!

  8. If it’s only symbol and mystery, how do you explain John 6:22-71 (particularly 6:54-58)?

    “Real flesh” and “real blood,” says the Savior. Not symbols. Not mysteries.

    Consider the disciples near the end of the chapter, the ones who walked away from the Living God because of the “hard teaching.” Christ did not stop them. He did not say he was speaking metaphorically. He did not say he was talking about a symbol or a mystery.

    They walked away from the hard teaching that they would have to eat his flesh and drink his blood. And he let them go.

    Then he turned to Peter and asked if Peter wanted to go, too.

    You can’t explain John 6 as a mystery or symbol. Mysteries and symbols aren’t so hard that people leave when they hear about them. Eating flesh and drinking blood are, particularly for 1st century Jews, for whom it is against their dietary laws.

    The manna was eaten. The Passover lamb was eaten. Christ is eaten.

    It’s not a symbol or mystery.

    • Scott, I have reread Fred’s paper several times to see where you found the words “only symbol and mystery” but I find them nowhere because that’s exactly what he’s not saying. His paper is more carefully nuanced. Secondly, if I read Isaiah rightly, that which is spiritual is no less real than that which is physical, and is in fact much more powerful (see Isa 31:1-3).