"Keep Doing This In Remembrance Of Me"...keep doing what???

minimus

If a Witness tells you that Jesus commanded you to go to the Memorial, how would you respond?

designs

JWs Memorial is an offshoot of the Levite's 'Special Meal', Lev.18:1+

Island Man

" If a Witness tells you that Jesus commanded you to go to the Memorial, how would you respond?"

Me: "Can you show me in the bible where Jesus told his followers to go to the memorial?"

JW: "It's right here in Luke 22: . . . It says: 'keep doing this in rememberance of me""

Me: "What was he telling them keep doing: just going to the memorial, or actually partaking of the bread and the wine in rememberance of him? What were the clear instructions in the preceding verses?"

JW: "But only those with the heavenly hope are to partake. . ."

Me: "So Jesus did not actually command going to the memorial as if that were an end in and of itself. What he commanded was partaking at the memorial and attending is just a necessary means toward that end. So it is actually very misleading to claim that Jesus commanded us to attend the memorial.

Jesus mentioned no exceptions when he instructed his followers to partake. The memorial is a memorial of Jesus' sacrificial death on behalf of allwho exercise faith. It is not a memorial of the establishment of a covenant with an elite few. All who accept Jesus' sacrifice and stand to benefit from it whether you believe in heaven or on earth should partake because Jesus gave his life for all - not just an elite few.

Therefore, those who refuse to partake of the bread and the wine in order to obey the fallible teachings of men - men who at one time did not even accurately understand the significance of the bread - are actually disobeying Jesus' explicit command to partake and are not worthy of being considered by christ as being his followers, because they put the teachings of men above christ's clear instructions.

So I will not be accepting your invitation to join you and your friends in your act of flagrant disobedience to Jesus' clear instructions. I will not join you in your apostasy!"

I quit!

I would have to ask them when it is. I have no clue. Is it tonight? I suspect it is because my wife is going to the KH tonight.

I would also tell them. "You won't go to church with me. Why should I go to your church" And like the above post I would tell then there is nothing in the Bible that commands anyone to go to a KH on a certain day once a year and snub his offer.

designs

Where do the Protestants and JWs get off saying the wine and bread are symbols.

Laika

Where do the Protestants and JWs get off saying the wine and bread are symbols.

Good question. The NWT changing 'this is my body' to 'this means my body' is just wrong.

prologos

laika, may be jesus, or the writers about him, were trying to correct the cannabalistic implications of John 6 "eat my flesh, drink my blood" By

have Jesus saying in effect " --this IS what I was talking about--see! now: eat and drink.--"

that is what I think.

Laika

Prologos, sure, John 6 is obviously about the eucharist meal, but the bible says this meal is symbolic about as often as it says baptism is symbolic. That is, never.

prologos

smart dogwy disagrees with you.

baptism is now symbolic of vow to obedience to the sprit-directed organisation, never they never.

who would have thought in 1914 Laika would be first into space (close to a rapture) in the 50s? back to topic:

I could reply to the invitation: thank you, but sorry I am already booked to an upper room very private ceremony with (gorgeous eastern, moon-rise exposure), and I keep doing that thing. but

with what we know now about the talking snake,

Why am I doing this?

SAHS

designs: “Where do the Protestants and JWs get off saying the wine and bread are symbols.”

Well, the alternative is to believe in transubstantiation – that is, that the bread and wine actually become the flesh and blood of Jesus. Dictionary.com defines transubstantiation as “ the changing of the elements of the bread and wine, when they are consecrated in the Eucharist, into the body and blood of Christ (a doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church).” The other theological dogma is consubstantiation, which Dictionary.com defines as “the doctrine that the substance of the body and blood of Christ coexist in and with the substance of the bread and wine of the Eucharist. ”

I really don’t see how there could be any logical sense in that. It sounds to me as confusing and just plain dumb as the trinity doctrine. That is one thing that I have to hand it to the JWs – that at least they don’t believe in those things. I’m sorry, but I say, Nonsense is nonsense.

"Keep Doing This In Remembrance Of Me"...keep doing what???

Share this