Communion-cannabilism?

Question

If everyone eats part of christ's body and drink's his blood. Then aren't we essentially considered cannibals? During communion

Answer 1

Communion is symbolic only. It is to demonstrate our commitment to Jesus.

Answer 2

No, and communion is still NOT merely symbolic. Human flesh and blood comes in the appearance and form of human flesh and blood and could nourish a body as such. Communion is distributed in the form of bread and wine and nourishes the body as bread and wine. Chemical anaylsis still shows it to be bread and wine. However, the Eurchist is still SUBSTANTIALLY the real Body and Blood of Christ and nourshes the soul as spiritual food. Again, it nourishes the body as bread and wine.

Answer 3

My mom felt the same way. She said that if the bread is the body.... so she didn't participate in communion. We belong to a church that only has a communion on Easter sunday. I never really thought about it though. Other than Jesus said do this in remembrance of me.

Answer 4

No, but its funny: Thats the exact same charge the Pagan Romans used to level against the Christians, which proves the first Christians believed in Transubstatiation

AND ITS NOT SYMBOLIC

Jesus said: "‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52). In Matthew 26:26 Jesus tells them how: "While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body."
After the resurection, when he was at the table with the travelers to Emmaus, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him. (Luke 24)

When a Catholic priests speaks Christs words over the bread and wine, the bread and wine become the Body, Blood , Soul and Divinity of Christ, but the "accidents" (appearance) of bread and wine remain. The theological term for this is TRANSUBSTANTIATION ( http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm#3 ).

..more info:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp

Answer 5

Communion is symbolic. It says on the altar and in the bible, "Do this in remembrance of me."

Answer 6

Yes that's just one reason why the bible has no scripture forbidding it (cannibalism). The other is obviously in cases of survival. In both cases you are eating the flesh of a human to survive and live. one literally and physically the other symbolically and spiritually.

Answer 7

Symbolic cannibalism. Horrible practice. I heard Hannibal Leichter delights in this ritual.

Answer 8

When you "think" of Communion, where does the "cannibalism arise?????

Answer 9

The ancient Pagans thought so, yes.

Answer 10

The R.C. Eucharist is not the Biblical remembrance of the Lord's supper, but is a misrepresentation of it, as they do in-deed teach a form of cannibalism, that the wafer is really Jesus corporeal flesh and blood, which is NOT what the disciples believed, or practiced.

Grammatically, that the bread was Jesus actual body is no more literal than the cup was actually the New testament in His blood (Lk, 22:20), rather it clearly represented it. Such allegories are very typical of Jewish typology. David once longed for a drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem, which mighty men of valor obtained at the risk of their own lives. “nevertheless he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the LORD. And he said, Be it far from me, O LORD, that I should do this: is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives?” (2Sam. 23:15-17). David thus equated the water obtained at the risk of the men's blood with that of their blood itself.

The disciples were Jewish, with Peter being kosher as far late as Acts 10, and as such they were strictly enjoined never to eat blood (Lev. 17:11). And there is no way they would simply submit to eating Jesus blood, especially Peter who even protested Jesus attempt to wash his feet (Jn. 13:6). How much more would he question eating His body! Nor would Jesus be allowing the disciples to eat something as important as this, unawares of what it really was.
Moreover Jesus was never in two places at once in his earthy ministry, and would not be sitting before the apostles and in their stomachs at the same time. And whenever Jesus did a miracle, it actually changed things, but a scientific examination of a consecrated host will show it to be bread, not flesh.

Neither does the heavily metaphorical gospel of John teach in chapter 6 that eating Jesus corporeally was necessary to have life in them (v. 53) as Rome supposes, as if it did then no one could have life in them unless they ate the Lord's supper, but the apostles never taught that this was how one became born again, which is how you get “life in you” (Eph. 2:1, 5), but by believing the word of the gospel, that of Christ crucified and risen again (Eph. 1:13; Acts 10:43-47). For Jesus said, “It is written, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Mt. 4:4).

Moreover, the analogy Jesus gave in Jn. 6 as to how we are to “eat His flesh” was that of how Jesus lived by the Father" (John 6:57), which was not by physically consuming Him, but by doing His will in believing and obeying Him, as Jesus said that was “meat and drink” (Jn. 4:34). Thus the interpretation of Jesus words requiring us to eat His flesh and drink his blood, was “It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you that believe not” (Jn. 6:63, 64). For as He said before, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life" (John 6:47).

Those who are deceived into believing the carnal interpretation of Rome (which the lost souls in Jn. 6:66 did) have “eaten the fruit of lies” (Hos. 6:13), and which is another example of the abundant use of metaphors regarding eating.
Such is one of the many perversions of God's word by an organization that took upon the form and much of the means of the Roman empire in which it was found, replete with it's own autocratic Caesario-papacy. It thus debases Scripture as a 2nd class authority at best, and exalts itself above all, promulgating multiple unBiblical doctrines from it's Roman perpetuated Petrine papacy to paedo-baptism to prayer to and for the dead. http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/papalpresumption.html
Also see http://www.christiantruth.com/
http://www.aomin.org/Roman.html
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/2594/

Finally, the ultimate error of Rome is that of fostering dependence upon her supposed powers, as well as one's own merits, for salvation, rather than convicting souls to come before God as sinners, destitute of any merit whereby they may escape Hell and gain Heaven, and thus cast all their faith upon Christ and His blood for justification by imputed righteousness and regeneration (Rm. 3:9 - 5:8; Eph. 1:13; Titus 3:5).

And having turned from sin to Him, be baptized under water (Acts 8:37) and walk in newness of life (Rm. 6). To God be the glory alone!!