Partakers of the Body of Christ and the New Covenant

[Tambora]

Paul certainly believed we are partakers of the bread (the one body of Christ) and the cup (the new covenant).

Luke 22:19-20 ESV
(19) And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
(20) And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.


1 Corinthians 11:23-26 ESV
(23) For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread,
(24) 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.”
(25) In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
(26) For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.


1 Corinthians 10:16-17 ESV
(16) The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ?
The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
(17) Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

 

[JudgeRightly]

PCD

?

 

[Derf]

PCD

I hope it doesn't cause you too much trouble.
Primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is a rare genetic condition that can lead to chronic lung, ear and sinus infections, along with other disorders in children Primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is a rare genetic condition that can lead to chronic lung, ear and sinus infections, along with other disorders in children

 

[Right Divider]

Paul certainly believed we are partakers of the bread (the one body of Christ) and the cup (the new covenant).

Luke 22:19-20 ESV
(19) And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
(20) And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.


1 Corinthians 11:23-26 ESV
(23) For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread,
(24) 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.”
(25) In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
(26) For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.


1 Corinthians 10:16-17 ESV
(16) The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ?
The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
(17) Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

I understand that you are forcing that belief on the scripture.

But you ignore everything else in the Bible to make that happen. It has been explained to you many times, that God makes the NEW covenant with the SAME other party as the OLD covenant.

Heb 8:7-13 (AKJV/PCE)​

(8:7) For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. (8:8) For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: (8:9) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. (8:10) For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: (8:11) And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. (8:12) For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. (8:13) In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.​

It's no surprise that this passage is in the book TO THE HEBREWS.

Other help that I imagine that you'll ignore:

https://graceambassadors.com/prophecy/30-reasons-we-do-not-operate-under-the-new-testament

https://graceambassadors.com/search?q=new+covenant&x=0&y=0#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=new covenant&gsc.page=1

 

[JudgeRightly]

Paul certainly believed we are partakers of the bread (the one body of Christ) and the cup (the new covenant).

Luke 22:19-20 ESV
(19) And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
(20) And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.


1 Corinthians 11:23-26 ESV
(23) For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread,
(24) 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.”
(25) In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
(26) For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.


1 Corinthians 10:16-17 ESV
(16) The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ?
The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
(17) Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

Participating in something from a different dispensation does not put us under that dispensation.

As Paul states clearly:

But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all the churches. Was anyone called while circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Was anyone called while uncircumcised? Let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters. Let each one remain in the same calling in which he was called. Were you called while a slave? Do not be concerned about it; but if you can be made free, rather use it. For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ’s slave. You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. Brethren, let each one remain with God in that state in which he was called.

Bible Gateway passage: 1 Corinthians 7:17, 1 Corinthians 7:18, 1 Corinthians 7:19, 1 Corinthians 7:20, 1 Corinthians 7:21, 1 Corinthians 7:22, 1 Corinthians 7:23, 1 Corinthians 7:24 - New King James Version

Live as You Are Called - But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all the churches.

www.biblegateway.com

 

[Right Divider]

I hope it doesn't cause you too much trouble.
Primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is a rare genetic condition that can lead to chronic lung, ear and sinus infections, along with other disorders in children Primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is a rare genetic condition that can lead to chronic lung, ear and sinus infections, along with other disorders in children

Another criminal case of attempted humor.

 

[Idolater]

Paul certainly believed we are partakers of the bread (the one body of Christ) and the cup (the new covenant).

Genesis 14
(18) And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. (He was priest of God Most High.)

Luke 22:19-20 ESV
(19) And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
(20) And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.

John 6
(55) For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.

1 Corinthians 11:23-26 ESV
(23) For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread,
(24) 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.”
(25) In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
(26) For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

Does verse 26 imply that the Corinthians should take Communion as much as possible?

1 Corinthians 10:16-17 ESV
(16) The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ?
The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
(17) Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

(18) Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar?
(19) What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything?
(20) No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons.
(21) You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.

 

[Tambora]

Genesis 14
(18) And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. (He was priest of God Most High.)

How lovely it is that there was already a priesthood of the Most High God in the world long before Israel existed and had nothing to do with the blood descendants of Abraham.
Not to mention that it was not the priesthood established for Israel that would be the priesthood that Christ would be of the order of.

John 6
(55) For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.

The true, indeed.

Does verse 26 imply that the Corinthians should take Communion as much as possible?

I don't believe so.
I believe it means that however often you do (whether it be once a week or once a month) it proclaims the Lord's death till He comes.
Partaking of the bread and the cup is a memorial ritual to forever remember the mighty and glorious work the Lord has already accomplished once and for all.
Much like the ritual feast days of Israel (Passover, Tabernacles, etc.) were done to never forget that the Lord freed them from Egypt and led them to the promised land of plenty.

To keep in memory the One that is responsible for all the great miracles when tribulations arise.

(18) Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar?
(19) What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything?
(20) No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons.
(21) You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.

Makes it hard to imagine that some would deny the one body of Christ is for all to partake of and the cup of the new covenant is for all to partake of.
Thank goodness Paul knew it was and could tell the whole world.

 

[Right Divider]

There are none so blind as those that will not see.

 

[Idolater]

How lovely it is that there was already a priesthood of the Most High God in the world long before Israel existed and had nothing to do with the blood descendants of Abraham.

It's interesting, right? Priests. It doesn't matter which deity they serve, priests are doing two things for people, they are mediating between the people and the deity, and they are offering sacrifices on altars to that deity (on behalf of the people). Even though we know almost nothing about Melchizedek, we know that he was a priest, so we know those two things about him as well.

Not to mention that it was not the priesthood established for Israel that would be the priesthood that Christ would be of the order of.

Right. That's what we believe. Aaron's or Levi's or Zadok's priesthood or ministry is "Old Covenant." Melchizedek "brought out bread and wine."

The true, indeed.


I don't believe so.
I believe it means that however often you do (whether it be once a week or once a month) it proclaims the Lord's death till He comes.

So how do you mean that in the doing of it, participating in Communion, is how to do it worthily? This means to me the only way to do it unworthily would be to abstain or not do it at all. I'm misunderstanding you or missing something. I'm referring to post 16

Partaking of the bread and the cup is a memorial ritual to forever remember the mighty and glorious work the Lord has already accomplished once and for all.

Do you think 1st Corinthians 10:16-21 is drawing a parallel between altars and tables?

Much like the ritual feast days of Israel (Passover, Tabernacles, etc.) were done to never forget that the Lord freed them from Egypt and led them to the promised land of plenty.

For sure. We celebrate Easter and Christmas for the same reason I think.

To keep in memory the One that is responsible for all the great miracles when tribulations arise.

"Do this in remembrance." It's literally to remember.

Makes it hard to imagine that some would deny the one body of Christ is for all to partake of and the cup of the new covenant is for all to partake of.
Thank goodness Paul knew it was and could tell the whole world.

Do you think that in 1st Corinthians 5:6-8 that where Paul says, "Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed," that he means by that "our," the House of Israel only, or does he mean the Body of Christ, the Church?

Do you think that in 1st Corinthians 5:9-13 that, "not even to eat with such a one," applies to Communion? Or is he literally saying to ostracize and basically "ghost" them? Like Matthew 18:17? (viz. "let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.") But then, wouldn't the Church want to evangelize Gentiles and tax collectors? So that doesn't seem right to me. It seems like it applies to Communion, or to some third thing, but outright ostracism seems incorrect, but I could be wrong.

 

[Right Divider]

It's interesting, right? Priests. It doesn't matter which deity they serve, priests are doing two things for people, they are mediating between the people and the deity, and they are offering sacrifices on altars to that deity (on behalf of the people). Even though we know almost nothing about Melchizedek, we know that he was a priest, so we know those two things about him as well.

Right. That's what we believe. Aaron's or Levi's or Zadok's priesthood or ministry is "Old Covenant." Melchizedek "brought out bread and wine."

The body of Christ has no priesthood. If it did, Paul would have told us.

In the dispensation of God's grace there is ONE mediator between God and men.

1Tim 2:5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:5) For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; ​

You should ditch that false religion of yours and join with Christ in His body.

 

[Tambora]

Do you think that in 1st Corinthians 5:6-8 that where Paul says, "Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed," that he means by that "our," the House of Israel only, or does he mean the Body of Christ, the Church?

I believe he means all of mankind.
What do you think?

 

[Right Divider]

Do you think that in 1st Corinthians 5:6-8 that where Paul says, "Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed," that he means by that "our," the House of Israel only, or does he mean the Body of Christ, the Church?

Why do you add to the WORD of God?

1Cor 5:7 (AKJV/PCE)​

(5:7) Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:​

 

[JudgeRightly]

Why do you add to the WORD of God?

1Cor 5:7 (AKJV/PCE)​

(5:7) Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:​

It can be translated as "Passover Lamb."

 

[Right Divider]

View attachment 9328
View attachment 9329

It can be translated as "Passover Lamb."

Okay, so this would be Paul's only use of the word "lamb".
Perhaps that is why the KJV translators decided to just call it just "passover".

 

[JudgeRightly]

Okay, so this would be Paul's only use of the word "lamb".
Perhaps that is why the KJV translators decided to just call it just "passover".

Agreed.

"Can" != "Should"

I was simply pointing out that he's not necessarily adding to Scripture by using "lamb."

 

[Right Divider]

Agreed.

"Can" != "Should"

I was simply pointing out that he's not necessarily adding to Scripture by using "lamb."

I stand corrected.

 

[Idolater]

I stand corrected.

You stand corrected by me, not by JR. Whether it's rendered "Passover" or "Lamb," either way you lost the argument. It's here for everyone to see.

And by you I mean Dispensationalists.

 

[JudgeRightly]

You stand corrected by me, not by JR.

No, my point was that it COULD be translated to include "lamb." Not that it SHOULD be translated that way.

If it SHOULD be translated that way, then what RD said was true, that it would be the only instance where Paul uses it and meant "lamb," and wouldn't much affect our position.

If it SHOULD NOT be translated that way, that would still fall in line with our position.

Whether it's rendered "Passover" or "Lamb," either way you lost the argument.

Saying it doesn't make it so, Idolater.

It's here for everyone to see.

Yes, the thread is still here for everyone to read.

And by you I mean Dispensationalists.

No "correction" has been done by you. RD was simply responding to a question that you asked.

 

[Right Divider]

You stand corrected by me, not by JR. Whether it's rendered "Passover" or "Lamb," either way you lost the argument. It's here for everyone to see.

And by you I mean Dispensationalists.

Are people drawn to the RCC because they are stupid or does joining with the RCC make them stupid? That might be a good research project.