This is a sincere question, so please don't call me a Pigot....
2006-11-26 07:48:08 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Anything is possible when dealing with barbaric religious zealots. Or...it could be there was not a Christ!
But seriously...no. Its not. Theres no body because there was more than likely not a Christ. Jesus is just a combantion of a bunch of traditions passed down by religions far older than Christianity. But even if you conceed that statement, its not illogical that there is no body. When dealing with things that happened thousands of years ago, evidence tends to be a bit shoddy to say the least.
2006-11-26 07:51:34 · answer #1 · answered by godlesschild9 1 · 0⤊ 5⤋
That's the first time I've ever heard that attempt to explain the empty tomb of Christ. The answer as to where is the body is found in the Bible, over and over and over again. Jesus Christ rose bodily from the grave and showed Himself to the disciples and many others. He told them to place their fingers in the nail prints in His hands and their hands in the spear hole in His side. He ate food to show that He wasn't a spirit/ghost but flesh and bones. After His resurrection, Jesus had a new spiritual body, the same as which all believers are promised.
2006-11-26 08:01:32 · answer #2 · answered by utuseclocal483 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The first answer given made me smile!
But I want to add the following:
No Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation.
Jesus still had his fleshly body when offering the bread. This body, whole and entire, was to be offered as a perfect, unblemished sacrifice for sins the next afternoon (of the same day of the Hebrew calendar, Nisan 14). He also retained all his blood for that perfect sacrifice. “He poured out his soul [which is in the blood] to the very death.” (Isa 53:12; Le 17:11) Consequently, during the evening meal he did not perform a miracle of transubstantiation, changing the bread into his literal flesh and the wine into his literal blood. For the same reasons, it cannot be truly said that he miraculously caused his flesh and his blood to be present or combined with the bread and wine, as is claimed by those who adhere to the doctrine of consubstantiation.
This is not contradicted by Jesus’ words at John 6:51-57. Jesus was not there discussing the Lord’s Evening Meal; such an arrangement was not instituted until a year later. The ‘eating’ and ‘drinking’ mentioned in this account are done in a figurative sense by exercising faith in Jesus Christ, as is indicated by verses 35 and 40.
Furthermore, eating actual human flesh and blood would be cannibalism. Therefore, Jews who were not exercising faith and who did not properly understand Jesus’ statement about eating his flesh and drinking his blood were shocked. This indicated the Jewish view on eating human flesh and blood, as inculcated by the Law.—Joh 6:60.
Additionally, drinking blood was a violation of God’s law to Noah, prior to the Law covenant. (Ge 9:4; Le 17:10) The Lord Jesus Christ would never instruct others to violate God’s law. (Compare Mt 5:19.) Furthermore, Jesus commanded: “Keep doing this in remembrance of me,” not in sacrifice of me.—1Co 11:23-25.
2006-11-26 07:57:48 · answer #3 · answered by Livin In Myrtle Beach SC 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
No.
The body of Jesus Christ was sealed in the tomb under Roman authority which meant that the Roman soldiers had to witness its internment. Te body of Jesus Christ was not to be released or the soldiers guarding it would be put to death.
We know Jesus Christ was bodily resurrected because of the lame excuse the Jewish Pharisees and priests told the soldiers to spread regarding the disciples stealing Jesus Christ's body. If that story were true the soldiers would have had to have been put to death. The soldiers were obviously not put to death as it was their job to spread the aforementioned false rumour.
Great answer by Livin in Myrtle Beach, SC
2006-11-26 07:59:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
You mean Bigot , not Pigot !! The holy communion in the form of bread and wine is taken , and not the body of Christ to be eaten , you have a mix up in information , get some rest and take it easy !! God bless you !!
2006-11-26 08:02:43 · answer #5 · answered by peter 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No! Jesus rose from the dead and acceded into Heaven. When Christ says "Take eat, this is my body". He's talking about the spiritual body of Christ.
2006-11-26 08:01:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
What's a "Pigot"?
Never heard that one before.
It could be that they had a communion of that sort. More likely the bones are kept secured away by a member of the Synth.
A local store that does its own commercials seems to be selling "Meats and Jesus", I thought I was hearing wrong, perhaps not.
2006-11-26 07:53:05 · answer #7 · answered by Gaspode 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Oh wow, ive never heard of that one before. Back in those days who knows what could have happened. I am a strong believer in Christ and God, but I cannot clearly say what I believe in as far as the bible and actions that happened so long ago because I was not there, and I know of no one who was. It's just impossible for anyone to know.
2006-11-26 07:52:12 · answer #8 · answered by jessangel8705 2 · 0⤊ 4⤋
no it is not possible as Jesus ascended to Heaven forty days after His bodily resurrection, but Holy Communion really is the body and blood of Christ.
2006-11-26 07:51:05 · answer #9 · answered by Sentinel 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I asked a similar question yesterday & got a violation. I think the whole idea of eating the body & drinking the blood is sick.
2006-11-26 07:57:19 · answer #10 · answered by shermynewstart 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋