Scan ahead to about the 20 min. mark. Why is the second half of 1 Corinthians 10:16 (...The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?) interpreted by Dr. Moore to mean only the body of believers (i.e. the "body of Christ") and not THE ACTUAL BODY of Christ? Why can't it mean both?
Verse 17 goes on to say, "Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread." We are bound into the Body of Christ by our participation in the Supper. I don't see how that precludes the THE ACTUAL BODY of Christ being there as well, especially as it was THE ACTUAL BODY of Christ that physically hung there, bleeding, for us and our sin. And John 6:30-59 speaks of the same thing. If the John passage is speaking clearly of eating Christ's body (and his listeners certainly thought that's what he was saying; note that Jesus does not correct them!) why assume that the the Corinthians passage IS NOT speaking of the same thing?
Just wondering. I'm puzzled sometimes how something that seems like a clear, plain passage to me can be seen in such a different light by others.
I couldn't get it to play.
Posted by: steve martin | 16 July 2009 at 08:50 PM
It took a few seconds to start, but it started for me. I'm using Firefox on a Windows machine.
Posted by: Barb the Evil Genius | 16 July 2009 at 09:54 PM
I'll try forefox. I'm such an idiot when it comes to these darn machines.
Where's an 11 year old when you need them?
Posted by: steve martin | 17 July 2009 at 09:58 AM
Seriously! What I wouldn't give for an 11 yr old nerd next door. :)
Posted by: Elephantschild | 17 July 2009 at 10:08 AM
Except, my 13 year old nerd has already picked up the IT lingo...neighbors asked him if he could come help them sync their Wii remotes...his response: "Have you read the manual?"...after a smack to the forehead from mom he went and synced the remotes, stat!
Posted by: Pam | 17 July 2009 at 01:24 PM