The Christ Is Still Incarnate
Nathanael Szobody on The Way is flesh; John 10:9
The Truth is flesh; I John 2
The Word of life is flesh; John 1
The way of truth through the word of life became flesh and remains flesh–resurrected flesh–to communicate that life to man . Life within the incarnate Christ, therefore, is continually communicated through physical means, the high points of which are the Sacraments.
All things were created through Christ because the Son is God’s means of communication of who he is. Creation reflected many attributes of God; it was a physical extension of his character. Though in sin this image was tarnished, both in man and in all of creation, God’s means of communication remain the same. He still communicates through the physical. Truth is given through spoken and written words; the law, though written on the hearts of all, was communicated on tablets of stone. Healing of snake bites in the wilderness was not by faith alone, but by faith acted upon by accepting the physical means: the bronze snake. God dwelled among his people through his tabernacle and later through the temple. Sins were forgiven when the sinner in faith laid his fleshly hand on the head of the animal as it was sacrificed. Naaman was healed of leprosy by faith only when he went and washed in the river. And the list goes on.
In James it is explained that faith is inseparable from good works. This is because faith is the means of establishing and sustaining a relationship with a God who uses the physical to do so. These individual acts that God has placed his promise in throughout history are high points which indicate an underlying purpose: God creates in order to have a physical scene in which to realize his relational presence. In all of scripture any creation, or the institution of ‘land,’ or the sacrifice of the physical (which in God’s manner is paradoxically the creation of new life) is always used by God to realize a more fulfilling presence characterized by sacrificial love.
This is made most clear in the incarnation. For when God wishes to communicate his greatest love and to realize a communion with his people to the fullest extent, he does not only use the physical to communicate his word, but he causes his Word himself to become physical man.
Now a strange thing happens among Evangelicals. It seems that After Christ’s resurrection God has become a Platonism. For it is taught that his body has ascended to heaven so that he could not be here physically in the bread and wine. Since when is Christ divided? Since creation all we know of the Word is in a synthesis of both spiritual and physical. Now it is supposed that God’s promises of physical presence in the bread and cup are not to be taken literally but that he is “clearly speaking symbolically.” I would pity the disciples if they had thought the same concerning the person of Jesus. If Christ is the eternal communication of God and if the very nature of that communication is by physical means then there is no reason not to take his promises at face value concerning baptism and the bread and cup. In fact if we do not, then it makes no sense to claim that our bodies are also physical temples of the Holy Spirit or that we are truly Christ’s body on earth.
Comments ( 6 )
When he took the cup he said: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood." He did not say that it is the symbol, representation or reminder of the new covenant, but that it is the new covenant.
Following the principle that scripture interprets scripture we can read Paul's commentary on these words in I Corinthians 10:16: "The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" Again, he does not say that the bread and cup are symbols, representations, or reminders (though Christ does say to "do this in remembrance of me" this is not refering to the essence of the bread and cup but rather the attitude of the believer in approaching it). It is truly a participation, or communion with the body of Christ and the new covenant which is in his blood. And the spiritual gifts therein are those of salvation, which has always come when we are made participants in Christ's death in faith:
Romans 6:3,4; Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
Philippians 3:8-11; For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith
But, just to further clarify, you fully propose to believe that the Lords Supper is not symbolic? In any way? I.E. - you prefer a litteral translation that says as the disciples litteraly sat in the room with Christ, they litterally ate His body and drank His blood as He commanded?
However I cannot say that the Lord's supper is not symbolic in any way. What I am proposing is that we take Christ's words at face value as we so often self-righteously claim that we do in other areas of scripture.
Certainly bread is symbolic all throughout scripture of the sustenance of life; therefore it is fitting that in the Lord's supper when Jesus, who is the sustenance of both physical and spiritual life, gives us his true body and blood, he uses bread and wine, the two staples of life in palestine in that day. But whatever the symbolism may be, it should not be our primary teaching on the Lord's supper since the very words of Christ and the apostles are litteral.
Cannibal! :-)
I regret that I can not find it within me to agree. Watch for my trackback.