Did Paul invent the Lord's Supper? (weird idea from article)

Post Reply
User avatar
morbo3000
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Did Paul invent the Lord's Supper? (weird idea from article)

Post by morbo3000 » Fri Feb 05, 2016 8:04 pm

I had never heard this before. The idea that the Eucharist started with Paul, and in turn inspired the gospels.

This doesn't make sense to me. But the reason to share the article is at the bottom.
This strongly supports the view that Paul was the inventor of the Eucharist. Paul did not simply “invent” the Eucharist by borrowing the rite from the pagan mystery religions, however. He created it from some imagined, deluded “vision” from what he thought was the heavenly Jesus (whether this “vision” was a mere dream or oral and visual hallucination we cannot say).
As a Christian who accepts critical scholarship, one of the things I find so remarkable is the unanimous scholarly acceptance of what are called the Authentic Letters of Paul. Doubt what you want, skeptics, about the Bible, but scholars really do believe there was a Paul, and he wrote letters about Jesus.

And thus, all the more remarkable, this statement that Paul couldn't have "Invented," the Eucharist. It came from a vision.

They call it a delusion. But it seems like the acceptance that it was a vision can just as likely have been a real revelation.

The only reason to not accept it as a revelation is the denial of the miraculous like materialists do. But "delusion" is not the only option.

I find this fascinating.

http://thoughtsphilosophyculture.blogsp ... arist.html
When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.
JeffreyLong.net
Jesusna.me
@30thirteen

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Did Paul invent the Lord's Supper? (weird idea from arti

Post by TheEditor » Sat Feb 06, 2016 12:24 pm

Hi Morbo,

I would just say that for one, Paul likely did "receive" this from the Lord in the way mentioned (a vision) since he was not present for the Lord's Supper--his knowledge of it's details were likely supernatural. What I find baffling is this insistence that the writer has in seeing the Catholic view of the Eucharist as being the bona fide one (transubstantiation); and he thinks that "It is highly unlikely that the historical Jesus ever said any of the words Paul attributes to him, especially with their cannibalistic overtones, which would have been anathema to Torah observant Jews." ??? Has the author never cracked open the Gospel of John?

Regards, Brenden.

[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Did Paul invent the Lord's Supper? (weird idea from arti

Post by Paidion » Sat Feb 06, 2016 2:07 pm

I doubt that Paul claimed to receive this from the Lord in a vision. The words that Paul states that our Lord said on the night that He was betrayed are very similar to the words He said as recorded by Matthew in Matt 26:26-29. In my opinion, Paul received this indirectly from the Lord, but directly from one or more of the 11 disciples who walked with Christ.

I would also like to point out that "the Lord's supper" is not tantamount to the eucharist (the thanksgiving) or communion (sharing).
Paul wrote:When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not. (1 Cor 11:20-22)
"Going ahead with one's own meal" would hardly be accomplished by taking a bite of unleavened bread. "Getting drunk" would not be possible by taking a sip of wine. The Christians were coming together to share a common meal in honour of Christ. This meal was called "The Lord's Supper." Obviously, those who came just to get a good meal, and/or get drunk were not honouring Christ, and thus it wasn't the Lord's supper that they were eating; it was their own supper.

Then following the supper, the Christians took the bread and wine of the eucharist, symbolic of the body and blood of our Lord.

This was patterned after that which the Lord did. First He had a passover meal with his disciples, and then he took bread saying, "Take eat. This is my body" and then wine saying, "Drink all of you; this is the blood of the covenant which was poured out for many for the forsaking of sins." (Matt 26:26-28). However, Matthew does not record that Jesus said, "Do this in remembrance of me." Neither does Mark or Luke.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
morbo3000
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: Did Paul invent the Lord's Supper? (weird idea from arti

Post by morbo3000 » Sat Feb 06, 2016 2:33 pm

Hi Brenden.
Has the author never cracked open the Gospel of John?
The author would say that John is the furthest from the historical Jesus, and thus the least likely to have any of Jesus' sayings accurate. I agree, though I like John a lot. But I don't think his later writing necessitates him receiving the idea from Paul, rather than an eyewitness.
What I find baffling is this insistence that the writer has in seeing the Catholic view of the Eucharist as being the bona fide one (transubstantiation);
On this one, I am guessing. My suspicion is that he is reading history backwards. That the practice of the Eucharist in whatever forms, developed layer upon layer, so he is comparing what it became in the earliest centuries to the texts. That looks more Catholic to us, not resembling what we believe the actual texts say.

Jeff
When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.
JeffreyLong.net
Jesusna.me
@30thirteen

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Did Paul invent the Lord's Supper? (weird idea from arti

Post by TheEditor » Sat Feb 06, 2016 3:50 pm

Thanks Morbo for your answers.

Paidion, this is more than a can of worms to open, but I am not sure that what we do today, which is a derivation from the Catholic practice, ever existed in the first century. The ceremony we refer to as "Eucharist" may be something that merely developed. There is a whole study on what "doing this in remembrance of me" actually meant. But personally I don't think there was any kind of wafer/sip of wine ceremony in the first century. I think that was an outgrowth of a communal meal that was ultimately institutionalized by the Church as it became such.

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

The Eucharist in the Second Century

Post by Paidion » Sat Feb 06, 2016 11:32 pm

Justin Martyr (110-165 A.D) wrote an "apology"(explanation) of the ways of Christians to the emperor of Rome, Augustus Cæsar and his son (as well as a few others). Here's what he wrote about the celebration of the Eucharist, recorded in chapters 65 and 66:
But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized [illuminated] person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation.

Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss.There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to γένοιτο [so be it]. And when the presiding one of the brethren has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion. And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Did Paul invent the Lord's Supper? (weird idea from arti

Post by TheEditor » Sat Feb 06, 2016 11:43 pm

Hi Paidion,

I am aware of the traditions that had built up over a relatively short time in the early churches. I am not at all convinced that it takes more than 20 years for a concept to become a hallowed tradition. I can say this emphatically because of studying the antecedents of various denominations and the relatively brief time that it took for something to become considered "radical", or even "anathema", even though the group itself used to practice that which it later condemned. Therefore, the fact that Justin wrote this probably some decades after the death of John, doesn't convince me that this was the tradition, namely, a Dixie cup of wine and a cracker as being that which Jesus inaugurated. Jesus merely used the occasion of the Jewish Feast of Passover, as an opportunity to shift the focus of his followers to what he was about to usher in. No doubt, there continued to be "love feasts" that had an adjunct partaking of emblems, but it became a problem, which is why Paul harshly criticized the practice as it became. Some feel that whenever believers gather together for a meal and fellowship, they proclaim the death of the Lord, because they, by fellowshipping, "discern the body."

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

dizerner

Re: The Eucharist in the Second Century

Post by dizerner » Sun Feb 07, 2016 12:19 am

Paidion wrote:Justin Martyr (110-165 A.D) wrote an "apology"(explanation) of the ways of Christians to the emperor of Rome, Augustus Cæsar and his son (as well as a few others). Here's what he wrote about the celebration of the Eucharist, recorded in chapters 65 and 66:
But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized [illuminated] person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation.

Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss.There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to γένοιτο [so be it]. And when the presiding one of the brethren has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion. And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone.
cool description

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Did Paul invent the Lord's Supper? (weird idea from arti

Post by Singalphile » Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:49 am

Yes, it's a weird idea. None of it really merits a response.

What I find interesting is that 1) a non-Christian - atheist or what have you - can be at least as cocksure in his or her theology, based on 95% speculation, as any professed believer, and 2) interest in theology and the corresponding cross-referencing and parsing of Greek, etc., is no indication or measure of godliness.

These are useful things to remember, I think.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
morbo3000
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: Did Paul invent the Lord's Supper? (weird idea from arti

Post by morbo3000 » Sun Feb 07, 2016 6:11 pm

Hi Singalphile,
Singalphile wrote:What I find interesting is that 1) a non-Christian - atheist or what have you - can be at least as cocksure in his or her theology, based on 95% speculation, as any professed believer
I think the author would say that he is not speaking theologically. He's trying to determine if Paul's letter was the source for the gospels' presentation of the Lord's Supper. That's a historical and textual question, not a theological one. The historian isn't interested in the manner in which communion is taken, nor the essence of the elements. Those are theological questions. The secular Biblical scholar's tools are history, archaeology, textual study, external and internal sources, etc. whose goal is to get at the text itself and the world beneath it, and not its modern religious meaning. And when secular scholars talk about theology they are attempting to trace the developments of theology as the texts evolved, and as the church evolved. Not its modern application.

His is not a majority opinion. But it is certainly a curious one.
When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.
JeffreyLong.net
Jesusna.me
@30thirteen

Post Reply

Return to “Acts & Epistles”