Last Supper, Lord's Supper最後的晚餐,主的晚餐

General Information 一般資料

(This presentation primarily discusses Protestant perspectives on the Eucharist. At the end of this presentation are links to Catholic and Jewish persectives, and a more general presentation on the Eucharist that includes presentation of the Orthodox perspective.) (本文主要論述了新教的角度對聖體聖事在本月底提交的紐帶,以天主教和猶太教persectives ,更具有一般性介紹了聖體聖事,其中包括介紹正統的角度) 。

The meal shared by Jesus Christ and his disciples on the night before he was crucified is called the Last Supper (Matt. 26:20 - 29; Mark 14:17 - 25; Luke 22:14 - 38; John 13:1 - 17:26).飯後分享耶穌基督和他的弟子們對前一天晚上,他被釘在十字架上是所謂的最後的晚餐。 ( 26:20 -2 9;馬克1 4時1 7分- 25條;盧克22時1 4 -3 8;約翰1 3時01 - 17 : 26 ) 。 It was the occasion of his institution of the Eucharist, when he identified the broken bread with his body and the cup of wine with his blood of the new Covenant.這是為紀念他的機構的聖體聖事,當他認定這破碎的麵包,他的身體和杯酒與他的血液中的新的盟約。 The ritual was that of a Jewish religious meal, which was given new meaning for Jesus' followers when they performed it in remembrance of him.祭祀的是一對猶太宗教餐,這是賦予新的意義,耶穌的追隨者時,他們的表現在記憶中的他。 Christians differ as to the meaning of the words of Jesus, the exact relationship of the bread and wine to his body and blood, and the frequency with which the rite is to be repeated.基督徒不同,以這些字的意義就是耶穌的確切關係的麵包和酒,以他的身體和血液,與頻率與該成年禮是要重演。 The Last Supper was also the occasion on which Jesus washed his disciples' feet and commanded them to wash one another's feet.最後的晚餐,也是一次對耶穌洗他的門徒的腳和指揮他們洗彼此的腳。 It has been the subject of art from earliest times.它一直受到藝術從最早的時候。

BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site相信宗教信息來源
Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects我們所列出的2300名宗教科目
E-mail電子郵件
LL Mitchell黎巴嫩鎊米切爾

Bibliography 參考書目
O Cullman, Early Christian Worship (1953); G Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy (1945); J Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus (1955); J Kodell, The Eucharist in the New Testament (1988); LL Mitchell, The Meaning of Ritual (1977). o cullman ,早期基督教崇拜( 1953 ) 100迪克斯,形狀的禮儀( 1945年) ; j jeremias ,聖體聖事的話,耶穌( 1955 ) ; j kodell ,聖體聖事,在新約聖經( 1988年) ;黎巴嫩鎊米切爾所指的禮儀( 1977 ) 。


Last Supper, Lord's Supper最後的晚餐,主的晚餐

General Information 一般資料

There are several distinct understandings of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper in modern Churches.有幾個鮮明的理解了聖主的晚餐在現代教堂。

BELIEVE includes a number of presentations which discuss these approaches, including the Churches and the individuals who first presented the concepts.相信包括一些介紹,其中討論這些辦法,其中包括教會和個人,首次提出的概念。


Lord's Supper主的晚餐

General Information 一般資料

The Lord's Supper is an ordinance of the New Testament, instituted by Jesus Christ; wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine, according to his appointment, his death is shown forth, - 1Co 11:23-26主的晚餐是條例的新約聖經,是由耶穌基督;下,給予和接受麵包和酒,據他的任命,他的去世是顯示出來, -1 co1 1:23-26

and the worthy receivers are, not after a corporeal and carnal manner, but by faith, made partakers of his body and blood, with all his benefits, to their spiritual nourishment, and growth in grace.並當之無愧的接收器,不經過體和肉體的方式,而是由信念,取得了partakers對他的身體和血液,以他的全部好處,他們的精神食糧,並生長在恩典。 - 1Co 10:16 -1 co[ 1 0:16

What is required to the worthy receiving of the Lord's Supper?需如何當之無愧的接收主的晚餐? It is required of them who would worthily partake of the Lord's Supper, that they examine themselves of their knowledge to discern the Lord's body, - 1Co 11:28,29這是要求他們誰的抱負得以參與主的晚餐,他們反省自己的知識去分辨主的身體, -1 co1 1:28,29

of their faith to feed upon him, - 2Co 13:5他們的信仰飼料後,他-2 co1 3時0 5分

of their repentance, - 1Co 11:31他們的悔過書, -1 co1 1時3 1分

love, - 1Co 11:18-20愛-1 co1 1:18-20

and new obedience, - 1Co 5:8新的服從, -1 co5時0 8分

lest coming unworthily, they eat and drink judgment to themselves.否則,未來混跡,他們所吃的喝的判斷,對自己負責。 - 1Co 11:27-29 -1 co1 1:27-29

What is meant by the words, "until he come," which are used by the apostle Paul in reference to the Lord's Supper?是什麼意思的話, "直到他來" ,這是一種用使徒保羅在提到主的晚餐? They plainly teach us that our Lord Jesus Christ will come a second time; which is the joy and hope of all believers.他們赤裸裸地教導我們說,我們的主耶穌基督來的第二次;這是喜悅和希望的所有信徒。 - Ac 1:11 1Th 4:16 -交流1時1 11 th4時1 6分

C Spurgeon c司布真


Lord's Supper主的晚餐

Advanced Information 先進的信息

In each of the four accounts of the Lord's Supper in the NT (Matt. 26:26 - 30; Mark 14:22 - 26; Luke 22:14 - 20; 1 Cor. 1:23 - 26) all the main features are included.在四個方面中的每個賬戶的主的晚餐在新台幣。 ( 26:26 -3 0條;馬克1 4時2 2- 26條;盧克22時1 4分- 2 01肺心病。 1: 2 3-26 )所有的主要特點是包括在內。 The accounts of Matthew and Mark have close formal affinities.該賬戶的馬修和Mark有著密切的正式關係。 So have those of Luke and Paul.所以有那些路加和保羅。 The main differences between the two groups are that Mark omits the words "This do in remembrance of me" and includes "shed for many" after the reference to the blood of the covenant.主要分歧有兩個組標誌著略去了話: "這件事在記憶中的我" ,並包括"大棚為許多"後,參考血的盟約。 Instead of the Lord's reference to his reunion with the disciples in the fulfilled kingdom of God, common to the Synoptic Gospels, Paul has a reference to proclaiming the Lord's death "till he come."而不是上帝的提及他與親人團聚的門徒在履行神的國度,共同向天氣福音,保羅有一個參考,宣告上帝之死" ,直到他來吧" 。

The meaning of Jesus' action has to be seen against its OT background.含義耶穌的行動已被視為對城市旅遊局的背景。 Questions are legitimately raised, however, about the actual nature and timing of the meal.問題是合法提出的,但是,對於實際的性質和時間的膳食。 The accounts seem to be at variance.帳目似乎有出入。 The Fourth Gospel says that Jesus died on the afternoon when the passover lamb was slain (John 18:28).第四福音說,耶穌去世當天下午,當逾越節羔羊被殺害(約翰18時28分) 。 The Synoptic accounts, however, suggest that the meal was prepared for, and eaten, as if it were part of the community celebration of the passover feast that year in Jerusalem after the slaying of the lambs in the temple.天氣帳戶,不過,建議飯後準備,並吃了,因為若不是社會的一部分,慶祝逾越節的盛宴當年在耶路撒冷後被殺的羔羊在寺廟中。

The Synoptic accounts raise further problems.天氣帳目提出進一步的問題。 It has been thought unlikely that the arrest of Jesus, the meeting of the Sanhedrin, and the carrying of arms by the disciples could have taken place if the meal had coincided with the official passover date.它被認為是不太可能逮捕耶穌,會議的公會,以及攜帶武器,由弟子可能發生,如果飯後適逢正式逾越節的日期。 Could Simon of Cyrene have been met coming apparently from work in the country, or could a linen cloth have been purchased for Jesus' body, if the feast was in progress?可西蒙的昔蘭尼已經得到滿足未來顯然是由在該國的工作,或可為亞麻布已經購買了耶穌的身體,如果這個節日是在進步嗎?

To meet all such difficulties several suggestions have been made.為了滿足所有這些困難的若干意見已經作出。 Some have held that the meal took the form of a kiddush, a ceremony held by a family or brotherhood in preparation for the Sabbath or for a feast day.有些人認為,膳食所採取的形式是一個kiddush ,所舉行的儀式中,由家人或兄弟會,準備安息日或稍後的一個節日。 It has also been suggested that the meal could have been the solemn climax, before Jesus' death, of other significant messianic meals which he had been accustomed to share with his disciples, in which he and they looked forward to a glorious fulfillment of hope in the coming kingdom of God.但也有人認為,吃飯可能被莊嚴高潮之前,耶穌的死,對其他重大救世主吃飯,他已經習慣了和大家分享他的弟子,他在其中與他們期待著光榮圓滿的希望未來神的國度。

Such theories present as many new difficulties as those they claim to solve.這樣的理論,當前許多新的困難,因為這些,他們宣稱要解決。 Moreover, many of the features and details of the meal accounted for indicate that it was a passover meal.此外,許多的特點和細節,飯後佔表明,它是一個逾越節宴。 (They met at night, within the city; they reclined as they ate; the wine was red; wine was a preliminary dish.) Jesus himself was concerned to explain what he was doing in terms of the passover celebration. (參加會議的代表在夜間,在城市,他們傾斜,因為他們吃;葡萄酒是紅;葡萄酒是一個初步碟) 。耶穌自己關心的是如何解釋自己在做什麼的角度逾越節的慶祝活動。 Scholars who regard the meal as a passover explain the attendant strange circumstances, and various theories have been produced to harmonize all the accounts.學者們把吃飯作為逾越節解釋服務員奇怪的情況下,和各種理論,已累計生產,以協調所有賬戶。 One theory is that disagreement between the Sadducees and the Pharisees led to different dates being fixed for the celebration of the feast in this year.有一種理論認為分歧撒都該人與法利導致不同的日期是固定的,為慶祝這個節日,在這一年。

Another theory suggests that Jesus held an irregular passover, the illegality of which contributed to his being betrayed by Judas and arrested.另一種理論認為,耶穌舉行不定期逾越節的,是非法的,這有助於他被出賣的,由猶大及拘捕。 (Such a theory could explain why there is no mention of a passover lamb in the account.) Attention has been drawn to the existence of an ancient calendar in which the calculations of the date of the passover were made on premises different from those made in official circles. (這種理論可以解釋為什麼這裡沒有提及一個逾越節羔羊,在帳戶)已提請注意存在一種古代曆法中的計算日期逾越節作了處所不同,從這些方面取得官場上。 The following of such a calendar would have fixed the date of the feast a few days earlier than that of its official celebration.以下這樣的一個日曆將有固定的日期,節日前幾天就比其官方慶祝。

There is no doubt that Jesus' words and actions are best understood if the meal is regarded as taking place within the context of the Jewish passover.這是毫無疑問的耶穌的言行,是最好的理解,如果餐視為發生的背景猶太人逾越節。 In this the people of God not only remembered, but again lived through, the events of their deliverance from Egypt under the sign of the sacrificed paschal lamb as if they themselves participated in them (see Exod. 12).在這人民的上帝,不但記住,但同樣經歷過,事件,他們救我們脫離埃及下簽署的犧牲逾越節羔羊,因為如果他們參加了他們(見exod 12段) 。 In this context, giving the bread and wine as his body and blood, with the words, "this do in remembrance of me," Jesus points to himself as the true substitute for the paschal lamb and to his death as the saving event which will deliver the new Israel, represented in his disciples, from all bondage.在此背景下,賦予麵包和酒作為他的身體和血液,與換句話說, "做這件事在記憶中的我, "耶穌點,以自己的真實取代為逾越節羔羊,並在其死亡後,作為節約活動將於提供新的以色列代表,在他的弟子,從各個方面勞役。 His blood is to be henceforth the sign under which God will remember his people in himself.他的血是要從此標誌下,上帝會記住他的人自己。

In his words at the table Jesus speaks of himself not only as the paschal lamb but also as a sacrifice in accordance with other OT analogies.他的話在餐桌上的耶穌談到自己不僅作為逾越節羔羊,而且作為犧牲根據其他城市旅遊局類比。 In the sacrificial ritual the portion of peace offering not consumed by fire and thus not offered to God as his food (cf. Lev. 3:1 - 11; Num. 28:2) was eaten by priest and people (Lev. 19:5 - 6; 1 Sam. 9:13) in an act of fellowship with the altar and the sacrifice (Exod. 24:1 - 11; Deut. 27:7; cf. Num. 25:1 - 5; 1 Cor. 10).在祭祀儀式的部分平安祭沒有消耗火災,因此沒有提供給上帝,因為他的食物(參見列弗。 3:1 -第1 1條;序號。 2 8:2)被吃掉神父和人民( l ev.1 9: 5 -6 1薩姆。 9時1 3分)在行為與獎學金的祭壇和犧牲( e xod.2 4:1-第1 1條; d e ut。2 7 :7;比照序號。2 5 :1-5 1肺心病。 10 ) 。 Jesus in giving the elements thus gave to his disciples a sign of their own fellowship and participation in the event of his sacrificial death.耶穌在給予要素,因此送給他的弟子的標誌,他們自己的體驗和參與了這項活動,他的殉葬死亡。

Moreover, Jesus included in the Last Supper the ritual not only of the paschal and sacrificial meal but also of a covenant meal.此外,耶穌在最後的晚餐儀式不僅逾越與祭餐,但也包含餐。 In the OT the making of a covenant was followed by a meal in which the participants had fellowship and were pledged to loyalty one to another (Gen. 26:30; 31:54; 2 Sam. 3:20).在城市旅遊局制定的一項公約其次是吃一頓飯,其中與會者有獎學金,並承諾忠誠一個網絡向另一個(創26:30 ; 31:54 ; 2 ,山姆。默3:20 ) 。 The covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was likewise followed by a meal in which the people "ate and drank and saw God."盟約關係上帝和以色列在西奈半島也同樣被其次為吃一頓飯,其中於民" ,吃和喝,並看見了上帝" 。 The new covenant (Jer. 31:1 - 34) between the Lord and his people was thus ratified by Jesus in a meal.新的盟約( jer. 31:1 -3 4)之間的主,他的人,因此批准了由耶穌在一餐。

In celebrating the Supper, Jesus emphasized the messianic and eschatological significance of the passover meal.在慶祝的晚餐,耶穌強調救世主和eschatological意義逾越節宴。 At this feast the Jews looked forward to a future deliverance which was foreshadowed in type by that from Egypt.在這個盛宴猶太人期待著未來的解脫,這是預示型,從埃及。 A cup was set aside for the Messiah lest he should come that very night to bring about this deliverance and fulfill the promise of the messianic banquet (cf. Isa. 25 - 26; 65:13, etc.).一杯是預留給彌賽亞否則他應該說非常晚,以實現這一救,並履行這一承諾的救世主宴會(參見伊薩25 -2 6; 6 5:13等) 。 It may have been this cup which Jesus took in the institution of the new rite, indicating that even now the Messiah was present to feast with his people.它可能已被這杯耶穌了該機構的新的成年禮,這表明即使是現在彌賽亞到場盛宴與他的人民。

After the resurrection, in their frequent celebration of the Supper (Acts 2:42 - 46; 20:7), the disciples would see the climax of the table fellowship which Jesus had had with publicans and sinners (Luke 15:2; Matt. 11:18 - 19) and of their own day - to - day meals with him.復活之後,在其頻繁慶祝的晚餐(使徒2時42 -4 6; 2 0時0 7分) ,門徒會看到高潮的金表,其中,耶穌曾與p ublicans與罪人(盧克1 5時0 2分;馬特。 11:18 -1 9)和他們自己的一天- -一天三餐他。 They would interpret it not only as a bare prophecy but as a real foretaste of the future messianic banquet, and as a sign of the presence of the mystery of the kingdom of God in their midst in the person of Jesus (Matt. 8:11; cf. Mark 10:35 - 36; Luke 14:15 - 24).他們的解釋是,它不僅作為最起碼的預言,但作為一個真正將預示著未來的救世主式的盛大宴會,並作為一種標誌,對存在的奧秘,神的國度,在他們中間,在人的耶穌。 ( 8時11分;比照馬克10:35 -3 6;路加福音1 4:15- 24 )。 They would see its meaning in relation to his living presence in the church, brought out fully in the Easter meals they had shared with him (Luke 24:13 - 35; John 21:1 - 14; Acts 10:41).他們將看到它的意義,關係到他的生活駐留在教會,帶出了完全在復活節餐,他們曾一起分享他(路加福音24:13 -第3 5條;約翰2 1時0 1- 14 ;行為10 :41)。 It was a supper in the presence of the risen Lord as their host.這是一個晚飯在存在復活的主,因為他們的東道主。 They would see, in the messianic miracle of his feeding the multitude, his words about himself as the bread of life, a sign of his continual hidden self giving in the mystery of the Lord's Supper.他們會看到,在救世主式的奇蹟,他吃飯千頭萬緒,他的話對自己作為麵包的生活中,一個跡象,他不斷的自我隱藏在給予之謎主的晚餐。

But they would not forget the sacrificial and paschal aspect of the Supper.但他們不會忘記的犧牲品,並逾越方面的晚飯。 The table fellowship they looked back on was the fellowship of the Messiah with sinners which reached its climax in his self identification with the sin of the world on Calvary.表團契,他們回顧了當時金的彌賽亞與罪人,而達到了高潮,在他的自我識別與罪惡的世界上calvary 。 They had fellowship with the resurrected Jesus through remembrance of his death.他們團契與耶穌復活後,通過悼念他的死因。 As the Lord's Supper related them to the coming kingdom and glory of Christ, so did it also relate them to his once - for - all death.作為神的晚飯有關他們未來英國和榮耀基督的,所以它也涉及到他們自己曾經-為-所有的死因。

It is against this background of thought that we should interpret the words of Jesus at the table and the NT statements about the Supper.正是在這種背景下則認為,我們應該解釋的話,耶穌在餐桌上和新台幣報表關於晚飯。 There is a real life giving relationship of communion between the events and realities, past, present, and future, symbolized in the Supper and those who participate in it (John 6:51; 1 Cor. 10:16).有一個現實生活中給予的關係之間的共融的事件和現實,過去,現在和未來,象徵著在晚飯和那些參與它(約翰6時51分, 1肺心病。 [ 10:16 ) 。 This communion is so inseparable from participation in the Supper that we can speak of the bread and the wine as if they were indeed the body and blood of Christ (Mark 14:22, "This is my body"; cf. John 6:53).這共融是如此密不可分,從參與中晚飯,我們可以講的麵包和酒說,如果他們確實是身體和血液基督的( 14時22馬克, "這是我的身體" ;比照約翰6時53分) 。 It is by the Holy Spirit alone (John 6:53) that the bread and wine, as they are partaken by faith, convey the realities they represent, and that the Supper gives us participation in the death and resurrection of Christ and the kingdom of God.它是由聖靈單(約翰6時53分)表示,麵包和酒,因為它們是由partaken信念,傳達出現實,他們所代表的,並說晚飯給我們參與在死亡與復活的基督王國神。 It is by faith alone that Christ is received into the heart at the Supper (Eph. 3:17), and as faith is inseparable from the word, the Lord's Supper is nothing without the word.它是由單獨的信仰基督,是收到入心,在晚飯(以弗所書3時17分) ,並作為信仰是分不開的字時,主的晚餐是什麼,沒有這個詞。

Christ is Lord at his table, the risen and unseen host (John 14:19).基督是上帝在他的桌上,復活和看不見的主機(約翰14:19 ) 。 He is not there at the disposal of the church, to be given and received automatically in the mere performance of a ritual.他是不是有在處理被沒收的教會,去分析和自動接收,在僅僅表現的一種儀式。 Yet he is there according to his promise to seeking and adoring faith.可是,他是有根據他的承諾,以尋求和崇拜的信仰。 He is present also in such a way that though the careless and unbelieving cannot receive him, they nevertheless eat and drink judgment to themselves (1 Cor. 11:27).他目前還以這樣一種方式,雖然不小心和不信不能得到他,但他們吃的和喝的判斷,以自己( 1肺心病。 11:27 ) 。

In participating by the Holy Spirit in the body of Christ which was offered once - for - all on the cross, the members of the church are stimulated and enabled by the same Holy Spirit to offer themselves to the Father in eucharistic sacrifice, to serve one another in love within the body, and to fulfill their sacrificial function as the body of Christ in the service of the need of the whole world which God has reconciled to himself in Christ (1 Cor. 10:17; Rom. 12:1).在參加由聖靈在基督的身體,這是提供一次-為-所有在十字架上,該教會的成員,是一個刺激,使由同一聖靈向自己的父親在聖體聖事的犧牲,以服務於一另外,在愛與身體,並履行他們的殉葬功能作為基督的身體,在服務的需要,也符合整個世界的真主已經調和,以自己在基督( 1肺心病。 10時17分;光碟。 12:1 ) 。

There is in the Lord's Supper a constant renewal of the covenant between God and the church.因此,在主的晚餐不斷更新的盟約與上帝和教會。 The word "remembrance" (anamnesis) refers not simply to man's remembering of the Lord but also to God's remembrance of his Messiah and his covenant, and of his promise to restore the kingdom.用"懷念" (記憶) ,是指不只是人的記住的主,但也向上帝的懷念他的彌賽亞和他的盟約,和他的承諾,以恢復王國。 At the Supper all this is brought before God in true intercessory prayer.在晚飯這一切帶來的是在上帝面前,在真實intercessory祈禱。

RS Wallace盧比華萊士

Bibliography 參考書目
J Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus; AJB Higgins, The Lord's Supper in the NT; G Wainwright, Eucharist and Eschatology; IH Marshall, Lord's Supper and Last Supper; FJ Leenhardt and O Cullmann, Essays in the Lord's Supper; JJ von Allmen, The Lord's Supper; M Thurian, The Eucharistic Memorial; E JF Arndt, The Font and the Table; M Marty, The Lord's Supper; E Schillebeeckx, ed., Sacramental Reconciliation. j jeremias ,聖體聖事的話,耶穌; ajb希金斯,主的晚餐在新台幣100 wainwright ,聖體聖事和末世;中轉房屋馬歇爾主的晚餐和最後的晚餐; FJ的倫哈特和O cullmann ,散文在主的晚餐;的JJ馮allmen時,主的晚餐;米thurian ,聖體聖事的紀念;電子怡富arndt ,字體和表;米馬蒂時,主的晚餐;電子施雷貝克,版,聖和解。


Lord's Supper主的晚餐

Advanced Information 先進的信息

The Lord's Supper (1 Cor. 11:20), called also "the Lord's table" (10:21), "communion," "cup of blessing" (10:16), and "breaking of bread" (Acts 2:42).主的晚餐( 1肺心病。 11:20 ) ,也稱為"上帝的餐桌" ( 10:21 ) , "共融" , "一杯祝福" ( [ 10:16 ) ,和"破麵包" (使徒2 : 42 ) 。 In the early Church it was called also "eucharist," or giving of thanks (comp. Matt. 26:27), and generally by the Latin Church "mass," a name derived from the formula of dismission, Ite, missa est, ie, "Go, it is discharged."在早期教會的,它被稱為還"聖體聖事" ,或給予感恩( comp.馬特。 26:27 ) ,並普遍受到拉丁美洲教會"地下"的名字來自於公式的離職,學院,彌撒曲"預測,也就是說, "走出去,這是出院" 。 The account of the institution of this ordinance is given in Matt.該帳戶是該機構的這一條例是在馬特。 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-25, Luke 22:19, 20, and 1 Cor. 26:26-29 ,馬克14:22-25路加福音22時19分, 20個和1個肺心病。 11: 24-26. 11 : 24-26 。 It is not mentioned by John.它沒有提到約翰。 It was designed, (1.) To commemorate the death of Christ: "This do in remembrance of me."我們的目的是, ( 1 ) ,以紀念去世的基督說: "這件事在記憶中的我" 。 (2.) To signify, seal, and apply to believers all the benefits of the new covenant. ( 2 ) ,以象徵,印章,並適用於所有信徒的好處,新的盟約。 In this ordinance Christ ratifies his promises to his people, and they on their part solemnly consecrate themselves to him and to his entire service.在本條例中基督批准他的承諾,以他的人,他們對自己的莊嚴consecrate自己,以他和他的整個服務。 (3.) To be a badge of the Christian profession. ( 3 ) ,以一個徽章的基督教界。 (4.) To indicate and to promote the communion of believers with Christ. (四) ,以顯示並促進共融的信徒與基督。 (5.) To represent the mutual communion of believers with each other. (五)代表互相交流的信徒與對方。 The elements used to represent Christ's body and blood are bread and wine.該元素用來代表基督的身體和血液都是以麵包和酒。 The kind of bread, whether leavened or unleavened, is not specified.什麼樣的麵包,是否有酵或酵,並沒有特別指明。 Christ used unleavened bread simply because it was at that moment on the paschal table.基督使用未經發酵的麵包簡單,因為它是在那一刻就逾越就座。 Wine, and no other liquid, is to be used (Matt. 26:26-29).葡萄酒外,沒有其他液體,是用來。 ( 26:26-29 ) 。 Believers "feed" on Christ's body and blood, (1) not with the mouth in any manner, but (2) by the soul alone, and (3) by faith, which is the mouth or hand of the soul.信教的"飼料" ,對基督的身體和血液, ( 1 )不符合在口腔的任何方式,但( 2 )由單獨的靈魂,及( 3 )條的信念,這是口或手的靈魂。 This they do (4) by the power of the Holy Ghost.這,他們這樣做( 4 )由電力的聖靈。 This "feeding" on Christ, however, takes place not in the Lord's Supper alone, but whenever faith in him is exercised.這個"餵養" ,對基督的,但是,發生並非在主的晚餐單,但每當他的信任,是行使。 This is a permanent ordinance in the Church of Christ, and is to be observed "till he come" again.這是一個永久性的條例,在基督的教會,並應遵守"直到他來" 。

(Easton Illustrated Dictionary) (伊斯頓說明字典)


Views of Lord's Supper意見的主的晚餐

Advanced Information 先進的信息

The NT teaches that Christians must partake of Christ in the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. 11:23 - 32; cf. Matt. 26:26 - 29; Luke 22:14 - 23; Mark 14:22 - 25).新台幣教導我們,基督徒必須參加基督教主的晚餐( 1肺心病。 11時23 -3 2;比照馬特。 2 6:26- 29 ;盧克22時1 4分- 2 3歲;馬克1 4時22 - 25 )。 In a remarkable discourse Jesus said that his disciples had to feed on him if they were to have eternal life (John 6:53 - 57).在一個了不起的話語耶穌說,他的弟子曾養活他,如果他們有永生(約翰6時53 -5 7) 。 The setting of that discourse was the feeding of the five thousand.定說,話語是餵養的5000 。 Jesus used the occasion to tell the multitude that it should not be as concerned about perishable food as about the food that lasts forever, which he gives them.耶穌利用這個機會告訴千頭萬緒,認為不應該作為關注的生鮮食品作為對糧食持續永遠,而他給他們。 That food is himself, his body and his blood.糧食是自己,他的身體和他的血液裡。 Those who believe in him must eat his flesh and drink his blood, not literally, but symbolically and sacramentally, in the rite he gave the church.那些相信他必須吃他的肉喝他的血,而不是從字面上來看,但在象徵意義上,並sacramentally ,在成年禮他給教會。 Through faith in him and partaking of him they would live forever, for union with him means salvation.通過他的信任和partaking的他,他們將永遠活,為聯盟與他的手段救贖。

The setting for the institution of the Lord's Supper was the passover meal that Jesus celebrated with his disciples in remembrance of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Matt. 26:17; John 13:1; Exod. 13:1 - 10).設立該機構的主的晚餐是逾越節餐慶祝耶穌與他的弟子們在悼念的救贖以色列撤出埃及。 ( 26:17 ;約翰十三; exod 。十三-1 0) 。 In calling the bread and wine his body and blood, and saying, "Do this in remembrance of me," Jesus was naming himself the true lamb of the passover whose death would deliver God's people from the bondage of sin.在呼喚著麵包和酒的他的身體和血,並說: "這樣做,以紀念我, "耶穌被命名自己的真正的羔羊逾越節的死亡會帶來上帝的人脫離罪。 Thus Paul writes, "Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed" (1 Cor. 5:7; cf. John 1:29).因此,保羅寫道: "基督,我們的逾越節羔羊,已犧牲" ( 1肺心病。 5時07分;比照約翰1時29分) 。

Transubstantiation陷於變體說

The doctrine of the Lord's Supper first occasioned discord in the church in the ninth century when Radbertus, influenced by the hankering for the mysterious and supernatural which characterized his time, taught that a miracle takes place at the words of institution in the Supper. The elements are changed into the actual body and blood of Christ. Radbertus was opposed by Ratramnus, who held the Augustinian position that Christ's presence in the Supper is spiritual. The teaching and practice of the church moved in Radbertus's direction, a doctrine of transubstantiation; namely, that in the Supper the substance in the elements of bread and wine is changed into the substance of the body and blood of Christ while the accidents, ie, the appearance, taste, touch, and smell, remain the same. In the eleventh century Berengar objected to the current idea that pieces of Christ's flesh are eaten during Communion and that some of his blood is drunk.中庸主的晚餐首次出現重大分歧,在教會在第九世紀時,拉得伯土,受夢寐以求的神秘和超自然的,其中的特點是他的時候,教導說是一個奇蹟,發生在話院校在晚飯。 要件正在轉變為實際的身體和血液裡的喊聲。拉得伯土是反對ratramnus ,持有augustinian立場,認為基督的存在,在晚飯是精神的。教學與實踐教會提出的在拉得伯土的方向,一個學說陷於變體說,即在晚飯的物質要素的麵包和酒,是轉變為實質的身體和血液基督的,而事故的,即,外觀,味道,觸摸,氣味,則維持不變,而在11世紀貝倫加爾反對目前的想法件基督的肉都是吃的共融與他的一些血是喝醉了。

With sensitivity he held that the whole Christ (totus Christus) is given the believer spiritually as he receives bread and wine.與敏感性,他認為,整個基督(所有基督) ,是由於精神上的擁護者,因為他所收到的麵包和酒。 The elements remain unchanged but are invested with new meaning; they represent the body and blood of the Savior.內容保持不變,但投資與新的含義,它們代表著身體和血的救世主。 This view was out of step with the times, however, and transubstantiation was declared the faith of the church in 1059, although the term itself was not used officially until the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215.這種看法是失步與時代同行,然而,陷於變體說被宣布為信仰的教會,在1059名,雖然這個詞本身是沒有用正式到第四lateran安理會在第1215 。

The medieval church continued and refined the teaching of transubstantiation, adding such subtleties as (1) concomitance, ie, that both the body and blood of Christ are in each element; hence, when the cup is withheld from the laity the whole Christ, body and blood, is received in the bread alone; (2) consecration, ie, the teaching that the high moment in the Eucharist is not communion with Christ but the change of the elements by their consecration into the very body and blood of Christ, an act performed by the priest alone; (3) that, inasmuch as there is the real presence of Christ in the Supper, body, blood, soul, and divinity, a sacrifice is offered to God; (4) that the sacrifice offered is propitiatory; (5) that the consecrated elements, or host, may be reserved for later use; (6) that the elements thus reserved should be venerated as the living Christ.中世紀的教會繼續和完善了教學陷於變體說,這種微妙關係,因為( 1 ) concomitance ,也就是說,無論是身體和血液基督的是,在每個單元,因此,當杯扣壓從俗人整個基督,身體和血,是在收到了單靠麵包; ( 2 ) consecration ,即教學,即由高級時刻,在聖體聖事是不是與基督的共融中,但改變的要素,由他們consecration進入非常身體和血液基督的,法由牧師單; ( 3 ) ,因為有一個真實存在的基督在晚飯,身體,血液,靈魂和神性,犧牲是提供給上帝; ( 4 )表示,犧牲所提供的是propitiatory ( 5 )表示, consecrated分子,或主機,可以保留,以便日後使用; ( 6 )表示,該元素,因此預留應該尊敬,因為生活基督。 The Council of Trent (1545 - 63) confirmed these teachings in its thirteenth and twenty second sessions, adding that the veneration given the consecrated elements is adoration (latria), the same worship that is given God.安理會的遄達( 1545 -6 3)證實了這些教誨,在第十三屆和第二十六屆會議,並補充說敬仰鑑於c onsecrated分子朝拜( l atria) ,同時崇拜的是給神。

Luther and Consubstantiation路德和consubstantiation

The Reformers agreed in their condemnation of the doctrine of transubstantiation. They held it to be a serious error that is contrary to Scripture; repugnant to reason; contrary to the testimony of our senses of sight, smell, taste, and touch; destructive of the true meaning of a sacrament; and conducive to gross superstition and idolatry. 改革者同意,他們譴責學說陷於變體說,他們舉行,它是一個嚴重的錯誤,是違背經文;反感的原因;相反的證詞,我們的感官視覺,嗅覺,味覺,和觸摸;破壞性的的真正含義,從樓上掉了;利於毛的迷信和崇拜。 Luther's first salvo against what he considered to be a perversion of the Lord's Supper was The Babylonian Captivity of the Church.路德的第一次齊射反對什麼,他認為是一種反常的主的晚餐是巴比倫囚禁的教會。

In it he charges the church with a threefold bondage in its doctrine and practice concerning the Supper, withholding the cup from the people, transubstantiation, and the teaching that the Supper is a sacrifice offered to God.在它指控他教會與三重枷鎖,在其理論和實踐有關的晚飯,扣壓杯離開了人民群眾,陷於變體說,與教學說,晚飯是一種犧牲,提供給神。 Luther tells about his earlier instruction in the theology of the sacrament and of some of his doubts:路德講述了他先前的指示,在神學的聖餐和他的一些疑惑:

"When I learned later what church it was that had decreed this, namely the Thomistic, that is, the Aristotelian church, I grew bolder, and after floating in a sea of doubt, I at last found rest for my conscience in the above view, namely, that it is real bread and real wine, in which Christ's real flesh and real blood are present in no other way and to no less a degree than the others assert them to be under their accidents. "當我後來得知,有什麼教堂,它被認為已頒布的,即thomistic ,也就是亞里士多德教堂,但我仍是大膽的,並經過浮在海上的疑問,我終於發現,其餘為自己的良心,在上述觀點,即,它是真正的麵包和現實酒,在基督的真正果肉和實時血目前在沒有其他辦法,並以不低於一定程度上比其他人斷言,他們可以根據自己的意外。

"I reached this conclusion because I saw that the opinions of the Thomists, whether approved by pope or by council, remain only opinions, and would not become articles of faith even if an angel from heaven were to decree otherwise (Gal. 1:8). For what is asserted without the Scriptures or proven revelation may be held as an opinion, but need not be believed. But this opinion of Thomas hangs so completely in the air without support of Scripture or reason that it seems to me he knows neither his philosophy nor his logic. For Aristotle speaks of subject and accidents so very differently from St. Thomas that it seems to me this great man is to be pitied not only for attempting to draw his opinions in matters of faith from Aristotle, but also for attempting to base them upon a man whom he did not understand, thus building an unfortunate superstructure upon an unfortunate foundation." "我得出這一結論,因為我看到的意見,該thomists ,是否獲得教宗批准,或由理事會,仍然只是表達意見,並不會成為文章的信念,即使是一個天使從天上被以法令另有規定( gal. 1:8 ) ,而什麼是斷言,如果沒有念經或證實啟示可能被追究作為一個意見,但不必相信,但這種看法的托馬斯掛起,所以完全在空中而不支持的經文,理由,在我看來,他知道,既不他的哲學也不是他的邏輯,為亞里士多德講的題目和意外,所以很不同於聖托馬斯說,在我看來,這位偉大的人物,是值得憐憫,不僅企圖吸取他的意見,在信仰方面,從亞里士多德,而且也為企圖以他們的基地後,一名男子的人,他不理解,從而為建設一個不幸的上層建築後,一個不幸的基礎" 。 (Works, XXXVI, 29) (工程,三十六, 29 )

Luther was feeling his way into a new understanding of the sacrament at this time, but he believed it legitimate to hold that there are real bread and real wine on the altar.路德感覺他的方式進入了一個新的認識了聖體,在這個時候,但他相信它是合法的舉行,有真正的麵包和實時洋酒走下神壇。 He rejected the Thomistic position of a change in the substance of the elements while the accidents remain, inasmuch as Aristotle, from whom the terms "substance" and "accidents" were borrowed, allowed no such separation.他拒絕thomistic的立場有所改變的實質要件,而事故仍然是的,因為亞里士多德,從誰而言, "物質"和"意外"借來的,讓沒有這種分離。 The "third captivity," the doctrine of the sacrifice of the Mass, Luther declared to be "by far the most wicked of all" for in it a priest claims to offer to God the very body and blood of Christ as a repetition of the atoning sacrifice of the cross, only in an unbloody manner, whereas the true sacrament of the altar is a "promise of the forgiveness of sins made to us by God, and such a promise as has been confirmed by the death of the Son of God." "第三圈養的, "中庸犧牲群眾,路德被宣布為"迄今最邪惡的一切" ,為在一個牧師索賠提供,上帝很身體和血液基督作為一個重複的atoning犧牲在十字架上,只有在unbloody方式,而真正的神聖祭壇上是一個"的承諾,該罪的赦免,以我們的上帝,而這樣的承諾,已證實死亡的神的兒子" Since it is a promise, access to God is not gained by works or merits by which we try to please him but by faith alone.因為它是我的承諾,獲得上帝不是取得工程或優點,其中我們試圖請他的,而是由信仰。 "For where there is the Word of the promising God, there must necessarily be the faith of the accepting man." "凡有字的有前途的上帝,必須有一定的信念,接受男子" 。

"Who in the world is so foolish as to regard a promise received by him, or a testament given to him, as a good work, which he renders to the testator by his acceptance of it? What heir will imagine that he is doing his departed father a kindness by accepting the terms of the will and the inheritance it bequeaths to him? What godless audacity is it, therefore, when we who are to receive the testament of God come as those who would perform a good work for him! This ignorance of the testament, this captivity of so great a sacrament, are they not too sad for tears? When we ought to be grateful for benefits received, we come arrogantly to give that which we ought to take. With unheard of perversity we mock the mercy of the giver by giving as a work the thing we receive as a gift, so that the testator, instead of being a dispenser of his own goods, becomes the recipient of ours. Woe to such sacrilege!" "誰在世界上是愚蠢到把一個承諾收到由他或一份遺書給他,作為一個良好的工作,這使得他以立遺囑人,由他接受它呢?繼承人會想像,他正在離開父親慈愛的,由接受本條款的意志和繼承它bequeaths給他什麼無神論厚顏無恥的是它,因此,當我們的人,接受遺囑的神來作為那些將履行一個好的工作,為他!本無知的遺囑,這圈養的那麼大從樓上掉了,是不是太傷心了,為的眼淚嗎?當時我們應該感謝所得到的利益,我們來目空一切,讓那些我們應該採取隨聞所未聞的變態,我們模擬了慈悲的賜予,讓作為一個工作這件事,我們在收到作為禮物,讓立遺囑人,而不是被配藥他自己的貨物,成為受援國起來。要將這種褻瀆" ! (Works, XXXVI, 47 - 48) (工程,三十六, 47 -4 8)

In his determination to break the bondage of superstition in which the church was held, Luther wrote four more tracts against the medieval perversion of the Lord's Supper.在他決心打破枷鎖迷信的,其中的教堂舉行,路德寫了四個多束對中世紀歪曲主的晚餐。 However, he also fought doctrinal developments on the other side.不過,他也打了理論上的發展,在另一邊。 Some who with him rejected Roman Catholic error were denying any real presence of Christ in the Supper; against them, beginning in 1524, Luther directed an attack.有些人同他拒絕了羅馬天主教誤差,否認有實質存在的基督在晚飯;指控他們,一開始,在1524年,路德進行了攻擊。 In these five writings he showed that, while he rejected transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the Mass, he still believed that Christ is bodily present in the Lord's Supper and that his body is received by all who partake of the elements.在這五年的著作,他表明,雖然他拒絕陷於變體說和犧牲的群眾,他仍然相信,基督是身體,目前在主的晚餐,並認為他的身體,受到大家歡迎,他們參與的要素。

"On this we take our stand, and we also believe and teach that in the Supper we eat and take to ourselves Christ's body truly and physically." "關於這一點,我們採取了我們的立場,我們也相信,並教導說,在晚飯我們吃,並採取自己的基督身體的真實和身體" 。 While he acknowledge the mystery, he was certain of the fact of Christ's real corporeal presence inasmuch as he had said when he instituted the Supper, "This is my body."雖然他承認奧秘,他肯定的事實,基督的實質是有形的存在,因為他曾表示,當他提起了晚飯, "這是我的身體" 。 If Scripture cannot be taken literally here, it cannot be believed anywhere, Luther held, and we are on the way to "the virtual denial of Christ, God, and everything."如果經文,不能按字面來這裡,但並不能認為在任何地方,路德舉行,我們正在就未來路向"虛擬否認基督,天主,和一切" 。 (Works, XXXVII, 29, 53) (工程,三十七, 29 , 53 )

Zwingli zwingli

Luther's main opponent among the evangelicals was Ulrich Zwingli, whose reforming activity in Switzerland was as old as Luther's in Germany.路德的主要對手之一是福音派烏爾里希zwingli ,其改革活動中,瑞士是一樣古老路德在德國。 While equally opposed to Rome, Zwingli had been deeply influenced by humanism with its aversion to the medieval mentality and its adulation of reason.而同樣反對羅馬, zwingli已經深深地影響了人類與它的反感,以中世紀的心態和其奉承的原因。 Luther felt an attachment to the whole tradition of the church, was conservative by nature, and had a deep mystical strain and suspicion of the free use of reason.路德認為,夾帶到整個傳統的教會,是保守的性質,並進行了深刻的神秘緊張和猜疑免費使用的原因。

"As the one was by disposition and discipline a schoolman who loved the Saints and the Sacraments of the Church, the other was a humanist who appreciated the thinkers of antiquity and the reason in whose name they spoke. Luther never escaped from the feelings of the monk and associations of the cloister; but Zwingli studied his New Testament with a fine sense of the sanity of its thought, the combined purity and practicability of its ideals, and the majesty of its spirit; and his ambition was to realize a religion after its model, free from the traditions and superstitions of men. It was this that made him so tolerant of Luther, and Luther so intolerant of him. The differences of character were insuperable." "作為一所處置和懲戒斯庫爾曼最疼聖徒和聖禮的教會,另一人是人文主義者讚賞思想家,仿古和理由,在他的名字,他們紛紛讚揚。路德從來沒有逃出感情的和尚和協會的迴廊,但zwingli閱讀了他的新約聖經與罰款意義上的,思維正常的,其思想指導下,結合純潔性和實用性於自己的理想,和陛下它的精神,以及他的野心是要實現一個宗教後,其示範工作,不受傳統和迷信的男人,這是這一點使他如此寬容的路德,路德,所以不能容忍他的差異,性格被不可克服的" 。 (HM Fairbairn, The Cambridge Modern History, II) (陛下費爾貝恩,劍橋大學近現代史上,二)

The chief differences between Luther and Zwingli theologically were Luther's inability to think of Christ's presence in the Supper in any other than a physical way and a heavy dualism that runs through much of Zwingli's thought.行政區別路德和zwingli theologically被路德的無力相信基督的存在,在晚飯在其他任何一個物理方法和繁重的二元貫穿許多zwingli的思想。 The latter is seen in Zwingli's doctrine of the Word of God as both inward and outward, the church as both visible and invisible, and his conception of the means of grace as having both an external form and an inward grace given by the Holy Spirit.後者被認為是在zwingli的學說的上帝的話,因為雙方的抵港及離港,教會作為有形和無形的,和他的構想的手段,寬限期為既是一種外在形式和外來恩典所給予的聖靈。 No physical element can affect the soul, but only God in his sovereign grace.沒有有形要素可以影響靈魂,但只有上帝在他的主權的恩典。 Thus there must be no identification of the sign with that which it signifies, but through the use of the sign one rises above the world of sense to the spiritual reality signified.因此,決不能識別的標誌,與它意味,但通過使用的標誌之一,上升到高於世界的責任感,以精神的現實,標誌。 By contrast, Luther held that God comes to us precisely in physical realities discerned by sense.相比之下,路德認為,上帝給我們正是在身體的實際情況發現,由常識。

Zwingli interpreted the words of Jesus, "This is my body," in harmony with John 6, where Jesus spoke of eating and drinking his body and blood, especially vs. 63: "It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail." zwingli這句話解釋為耶穌的, "這是我的身體" ,在和諧與John 6 ,耶穌曾經談到大吃大喝他的身體和血液,特別是對63條: "正是這種精神,使生命的,是撒但的無濟於事" 。 Therefore, he reasoned, not only is transubstantiation, that somehow Christ is corporeally in, under, and with the elements.因此,他推斷,不僅是陷於變體說,這在某種程度上基督是corporeally中,下,並與元素。 The doctrine of physical eating is absurd and repugnant to common sense.理論物理吃,是荒謬的和令人反感的,以普通常識。 Moreover, God does not ask us to believe that which is contrary to sense experience.此外,上帝不要求我們相信,這是違反常識的經驗。 The word "is" in the words of institution means "signifies," or "represents," and must be interpreted figuratively, as is done in other "I am" passages in the Bible.用"是"字的事業單位是指"意味" ,或者說"三個代表"的要求,必須加以解釋打個比方,就像做其他的"我"通道,在聖經中。 Christ's ascension means that he took his body from earth to heaven.基督的阿森松島,就是他了他的身體,從地球到天堂。

Zwingli's shortcoming was his lack of appreciation for the real presence of Christ in the Supper in his Holy Spirit and a real feeding of the faithful on Him. zwingli的缺點是,他缺乏讚賞真實存在的基督在晚餐,在他的神聖的精神和一個真正的飼忠實於他。 What he needed for an adequate doctrine was Luther's belief in the reality of communion with Christ and a reception of Him in the Supper.他所需要的足夠的學說是路德的信仰是在現實與基督的共融和酒會,他在晚飯。 This was to be found in Calvin.這是被發現在卡爾文。

Calvin卡爾文

Calvin's view of the Lord's Supper appears to be a mediate position between the views of Luther and Zwingli, but it is in fact an independent position.卡爾文的觀點主的晚餐似乎是一個調解的立場與觀點的路德和zwingli ,但它實際上是在一個獨立的位置。 Rejecting both Zwingli's "memorialism" and Luther's "monstrous notion of ubiquity" (Inst. 4.17.30), he held that there is a real reception of the body and blood of Christ in the supper, only in a spiritual manner.駁回雙方zwingli的" memorialism "路德的"滔天的概念無處不在" ( inst. 4.17.30 ) ,他並認為,是一個真正的接收機構和血液基督在晚餐中,只有在一種精神的方式。 The sacrament is a real means of grace, a channel by which Christ communicates himself to us.聖事是一個真正的手段恩典,一個渠道是由基督傳達自己給我們。 With Zwingli, Calvin held that after the ascension Christ retained a real body which is located in heaven.與zwingli ,卡爾文後認為阿森松基督保留了一個真正的機構是設在天上。 Nothing should be taken from Christ's "heavenly glory, as happens when he is brought under the corruptible elements of this world, or bound to any earthly creatures. . . Nothing inappropriate to human nature (should) be ascribed to his body, as happens when it is said either to be infinite or to be put in a number of places at once" (Inst. 4.12.19).不應該採取從基督的"天國的榮耀,因為發生時,他是受到了腐朽的要素這個世界上,或簽任何俗世的動物… … 。沒有什麼不合適的人的本質(應)歸功於他的身體,因為當有人說,要么是無限或將要付諸表決,在一些地方,在一次" ( inst. 4.12.19 ) 。

With Luther, Calvin believed that the elements in the Supper are signs which exhibit the fact that Christ is truly present, and he repudiated Zwingli's belief that the elements are signs which represent what is absent.同路德,卡爾文認為,該元素在晚飯跡象,其中呈現的是事實,即基督是真正的現在,他批判了zwingli的信念,即分子的跡象,這代表著什麼是缺席。 Inasmuch as the doctrine of the real presence of Christ in the Supper was the key issue in the eucharistic debate, it is obvious that Luther and Calvin agreed more than did Calvin and Zwingli.因為該學說的真正存在的基督在晚飯是關鍵問題,在聖體聖事的辯論活動,顯然是路德和卡爾文同意以上沒有卡爾文和zwingli 。 The latter's conception of Christ's presence was "by the contemplation of faith" but not "in essence and reality."後者的概念基督的存在,是"由沉思的信念" ,而不是"在本質上和現實" 。 For Luther and Calvin communion with a present Christ who actually feeds believers with his body and blood is what makes the sacrament.為路德和卡爾文共融與本基督的人,其實飼料信徒與他的身體和血,是什麼使得聖餐。 The question between them was the manner in which Christ's body exists and is given to believers.問題,它們之間是何種方式在基督身體的存在,是給信徒。

In his response to this question Calvin rejected the Eutychian doctrine of the absorption of Christ's humanity by his divinity, an idea he found in some of his Lutheran opponents, and any weakening of the idea of a local presence of the flesh of Christ in heaven.他在回應這個問題卡爾文拒絕eutychian學說的吸收基督的人性,他的神性,一個概念,他發現在他的一些路德對手實力,任何削弱的思想,局部存在的耶穌的身體在天上。 While Christ is bodily in heaven, distance is overcome by the Holy Spirit, who vivifies believers with Christ's flesh.而基督是身體在天上,距離是克服了聖靈,他們vivifies信徒與基督的血和肉。 Thus the Supper is a true communion with Christ, who feeds us with his body and blood.因此,晚飯是一個真正與基督的共融中,他們養育我們與他的身體和血液。 "We must hold in regard to the mode, that it is not necessary that the essence of the flesh should descend from heaven in order to our being fed upon it, the virtue of the Spirit being sufficient to break through all impediments and surmount any distance of place. " ,我們要在考慮到模式中,認為沒有必要說,本質上屬肉體應該降臨從天上,以我們正在美聯儲後,美德的精神正足以衝破一切障礙和克服任何距離不適當的。

Meanwhile, we deny not that this mode is incomprehensible to the human mind; because neither can flesh naturally be the life of the soul, nor exert its power upon us from heaven, nor without reason is the communion which makes us flesh of the flesh of Christ, and bone of his bones, called by Paul, 'A great mystery' (Eph. 5:30).同時,我們也不能否認,這個模式是難以理解的人的頭腦,因為既不可以肉體自然生命的靈魂,也沒有發揮其權力後,我們從天上,也沒有原因,是交流,使我們的血肉屬肉體的基督,與骨他的骨頭,所謂的保羅, '一個偉大的奧秘』 (以弗所書5:30 ) 。 Therefore, in the sacred Supper, we acknowledge a miracle which surpasses both the limits of nature and the measure of our sense, while the life of Christ is common to us, and his flesh is given us for food.因此,在神聖的晚飯,我們承認是一個奇蹟,這要高於這兩個極限的性質和衡量我們的意識,而生命的基督是共同對我們來說,和他的肉是給我們食物。 But we must have done with all inventions inconsistent with the explanation lately given, such as the ubiquity of the body, the secret inclosing under the symbol of bread, and the substantial presence on earth." (Tracts, II, 577)但是,我們必須做的一切發明創造不符合解釋近來由於,例如無處不在的身體,秘密inclosing下象徵麵包,以及大量存在於地球" (域,二, 577頁)

Calvin held that the essence of Christ's body was its power.卡爾文認為,本質上的基督身體的是它的威力。 In itself it is of little value since it "had its origin from earth, and underwent death" (Inst. 4.17.24), but the Holy Spirit, who gave Christ a body, communicates its power to us so that we receive the whole Christ in Communion.本身是沒有多大價值,因為它"有它的起源,從地球,並經歷了死" ( inst. 4.17.24 ) ,但聖靈的人了基督的一個機構,傳達其權力我們,使我們得到整個基督共融。 The difference from Luther here is not great, for he held that the "right hand of God" to which Christ ascended meant God's power, and that power is everywhere.差額由路德在這裡不是很大,因為他認為"正確的上帝之手" ,以基督登基意味著上帝的權力,權力是無處不在。 The real difference between Luther and Calvin lay in the present existence of Christ's body.真正的區別路德和卡爾文臥在目前存在的基督身體。 Calvin held that it is in a place, heaven, while Luther said that it has the same omnipresence as Christ's divine nature.卡爾文認為,它是在一個地方,天堂,而路德說,它已同無處不在,因為基督的神性。 Both agreed that there is deep mystery here which can be accepted though not understood.雙方一致認為,有深層的奧秘在這裡可以接受,雖然沒有理解。 "If anyone should ask me how this (partaking of the whole Christ) takes place, I shall not be ashamed to confess that it is a secret too lofty for either my mind to comprehend or my words to declare. . . I rather experience than understand it." "如果有人要問我,如何今( partaking的整個基督)發生,我將不感到羞愧坦白地說,這是一個秘密,太崇高無論是我心目中理解或我的話要申報… … 。我相當經驗比理解" 。 (Inst. 4.17.32) ( inst. 4.17.32 )

Summary摘要

While each of the positions declineated above sought to do justice to the Holy Supper which the Lord has given his church, and while each has in it elements of truth, Calvin's position has received widest acceptance within the universal church.而每項職位declineated以上力求做到公正,以神聖的晚飯,其中主給了他的教會,而在每一個已在它的內容真理,卡爾文的立場得到了廣泛的認同普世教會。 Moreover, it is the position closest to the thinking of contemporary theologians within both the Roman Catholic and Lutheran traditions. It is a position which sees the Lord's Supper as a rite instituted by Jesus Christ in which bread is broken and the fruit of the vine is poured out in thankful remembrance of Christ's atoning sacrifice, having become, through their reception and the sacramental blessing given by the Holy Spirit, the communion (that is, a partaking) of the body and blood of Christ and an anticipation of full future salvation.此外,它的立場是最接近其思想的當代神學家在這兩個羅馬天主教和路德傳統, 它是一個立場存有主的晚餐作為成年禮由耶穌基督在麵包被打破,果實的藤蔓是倒在感恩紀念基督的atoning犧牲後,成為,通過對他們的接待和聖福所給予的聖靈,共融(即, partaking )的身體和血液基督和期待的未來充滿救國。

ME Osterhaven我osterhaven
(Elwell Evangelical Dictionary) ( Elwell宣布了福音字典)

Bibliography 參考書目
"The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent," in Creeds of Christendom, II, ed. "大砲和法令,安理會的遄達" ,在教義的基督教,二,對外債務。 P Schaff; J Pelikan and HT Lehmann, eds., Luther's Works; J Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. p schaff ; j pelikan和HT萊曼合編,路德的作品; j卡爾文學院的基督教宗教,教育署。 JT McNeill, and Tracts Relating to the Reformation; GW Bromiley, ed., Zwingli and Bullinger; K McDonnell, John Calvin, the Church, and the Eucharist; D Bridge and D Phypers, Communion: The Meal That Unites?特魯利McNeill商品,並束涉及到改造;毛重羅米立,海關, zwingli和布凌格; k麥克唐奈,約翰卡爾文,教會,聖體聖事; d橋樑和D phypers ,共融:餐國美國?


The Last Supper最後的晚餐

Catholic Information 天主教資訊

The meal held by Christ and His disciples on the eve of His Passion at which He instituted the Holy Eucharist.飯後舉行基督和他的弟子們對即將到來的,他的激情,他建立了聖體聖事。

TIME時間

The Evangelists and critics generally agree that the Last Supper was on a Thursday, that Christ suffered and died on Friday, and that He arose from the dead on Sunday.福音和評論家普遍認為,最後的晚餐是一個週四,即基督遭受痛苦和死亡週五一樣,他出現了從死對週日。 As to the day of the month there seems a difference between the record of the synoptic Gospels and that of St. John.至於把一個月的第一天起似乎有差異的記錄天氣福音,即聖約翰。 In consequence some critics have rejected the authenticity of either account or of both.因此一些批評者都不願接受的真實性,要么賬戶或兩者並用。 Since Christians, accepting the inspiration of the Scriptures, cannot admit contradictions in the sacred writers, various attempts have been made to reconcile the statements.自從基督信徒,接受故事的靈感會念經,可承不承認矛盾,在神聖的作家,各種嘗試,已取得調和報表。 Matthew 26:17 says, "And on the first day of the Azymes"; Mark 14:12, "Now on the first day of the unleavened bread, when they sacrificed the pasch"; Luke 22:7, "And the day of the unleavened bread came, on which it was necessary that the pasch should be killed".馬修26:17說, "就在第一天的azymes " ;大關14:12 , "現在起,就在第一天的未經發酵的麵包,當他們犧牲了pasch " ;盧克22時07分, "與天無酵麵包來了,對那些有必要指出pasch應該被殺死" 。 From these passages it seems to follow that Jesus and his disciples conformed to the ordinary custom, that the Last Supper took place on the 14th of Nisan, and that the Crucifixion was on the l5th, the great festival of the Jews.從這些通道,它似乎是跟隨耶穌和他的弟子也符合一般的習慣,這最後的晚餐發生於14日尼散月14日,並規定被釘死在十字架上l5th ,偉大的節日猶太人。 This opinion, held by Tolet, Cornelius a Lapide, Patrizi, Corluy, Hengstenberg, Ohlshausen, and Tholuck, is confirmed by the custom of the early Eastern Church which, looking to the day of the month, celebrated the commemoration of the Lord's Last Supper on the 14th of Nisan, without paying any attention to the day of the week.這個意見,召開由tolet ,科尼利厄斯一拉闢特的哥尼流,柏德, corluy ,韓斯坦堡, ohlshausen , tholuck ,是證實了這一習俗初東歐教會,尋找到一個月的第一天起,慶祝紀念主的最後的晚餐於14日尼散月14日,而不付出任何注意一天的一周。 This was done in conformity with the teaching of St. John the Evangelist.這樣做是符合教學的聖約翰福音。 But in his Gospel, St. John seems to indicate that Friday was the 14th of Nisan, for (18:28) on the morning of this day the Jews "went not into the hall, that they might not be defiled, but that they might eat the pasch".但在他的福音,聖約翰似乎顯示週五是第十四屆尼散月14日,為( 18時28分)於當天上午在這一天,猶太人"竟沒有進入大廳,他們可能不會玷污,但他們可能是吃pasch " 。 Various things were done on this Friday which could not be done on a feast, viz., Christ is arrested, tried, crucified; His body is taken down" (because it was the parasceve) that the bodies might not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day (for that was a great sabbath day)"; the shroud and ointments are bought, and so on.各種事情做對,這週五不能做一個盛宴,即,基督是逮捕,審判,被釘十字架,他的身體是下來" (因為它是parasceve )表示,該組織可能不會留任後,就兩岸關係安息日一天(這是一個偉大的安息日) " ;徒手和眼藥膏都買,等等。

The defenders of this opinion claim that there is only an apparent contradiction and that the differing statements may be reconciled.捍衛這個意見要求,目前只有一個明顯的矛盾,並表示,不同的陳述可能調和。 For the Jews calculated their festivals and Sabbaths from sunset to sunset: thus the Sabbath began after sunset on Friday and ended at sunset on Saturday.為猶太人計算,他們的節日和安息日,從日落到日落:所以安息日開始後,日落就週五結束,在夕陽上週六。 This style is employed by the synoptic Gospels, while St. John, writing about twenty-six years after the destruction of Jerusalem, when Jewish law and customs no longer prevailed, may well have used the Roman method of computing time from midnight to midnight.這種作風是受僱於天氣福音,而在聖約翰,在寫二十六年後,摧毀耶路撒冷,猶太人的時候,法律和海關不再盛行,很可能是用羅馬方法的計算時間,由午夜十二時至午夜十二時。 The word pasch does not exclusively apply to the paschal lamb on the eve of the feast, but is used in the Scriptures and in the Talmud in a wider sense for the entire festivity, including the chagigah; any legal defilement could have been removed by the evening ablutions; trials, and even executions and many servile works, though forbidden on the Sabbath, were not forbidden on feasts (Numbers 28:16; Deuteronomy 16:23).字pasch並不完全適用於逾越節羔羊,對即將到來的節日,而且是用在聖經和猶太法典,在更廣泛的意義上,為整個節日的時候,包括chagigah ;任何法律污辱可能已被調離,由傍晚浴室;審判,甚至處決,並有很多奴性工程,但不得對安息日,並沒有禁止對宴(號碼28:16 ;申命記16:23 ) 。 The word parasceve may denote the preparation for any Sabbath and may be the common designation for any Friday, and its connexion with pasch need not mean preparation for the Passover but Friday of the Passover season and hence this Sabbath was a great Sabbath.字parasceve可能是指編寫任何安息日,並可能共同指定任何週五,其Connexion公司與pasch並不意味著要為準備逾越節,但週五的逾越節季節,因此這個安息日,是一個偉大的安息日。 Moreover it seems quite certain that if St. John intended to give a different date from that given by the Synoptics and sanctioned by the custom of his own Church at Ephesus, he would have said so expressly.此外,它似乎很肯定的是,如果聖約翰以給予不同的日期,從該所synoptics和制裁的習俗,他自己的教會,在以弗所,他會說了這麼明確。 Others accept the apparent statement of St. John that the Last Supper was on the 13th of Nisan and try to reconcile the account of the Synoptics.別人接受表觀聲明聖約翰表示,最後的晚餐是在13日,尼散,並盡力調解戶口的synoptics 。 To this class belong Paul of Burgos, Maldonatus, Pétau, Hardouin, Tillemont, and others.為了這門課是屬於保羅的布爾戈斯, maldonatus , pétau , hardouin ,蒂耶蒙和等。 Peter of Alexandria (PG, XCII, 78) says: "In previous years Jesus had kept the Passover and eaten the paschal lamb, but on the day before He suffered as the true Paschal Lamb He taught His disciples the mystery of the type."彼得亞歷山大公司( PG , xcii , 78 )說: "前幾年,耶穌保持逾越節吃的逾越節羔羊,但就在前一天,他所遭受的真正的逾越節羔羊,他教導他的弟子之謎的類型" 。 Others say: Since the Pasch, falling that year on a Friday, was reckoned as a Sabbath, the Jews, to avoid the inconvenience of two successive Sabbaths, had postponed the Passover for a day, and Jesus adhered to the day fixed by law; others think that Jesus anticipated the celebration, knowing that the proper time He would be in the grave.其他人說:自從pasch ,屬於這一年就週五,被忽視的一個安息日,猶太人,為了避免不便,兩個連續的安息日,推遲了逾越節的一個休息日,與耶穌,堅持以每天固定法;有人認為耶穌預期的慶祝,知道適當的時候,他將在墳墓。

PLACE地方

The owner of the house in which was the upper room of the Last Supper is not mentioned in Scripture; but he must have been one of the disciples, since Christ bids Peter and John say, "The Master says".房主人在當時頂樓房間的最後的晚餐是沒有提到的經文,但他必須有一個門徒,因為基督出價彼得和約翰說, "師父說" 。 Some say it was Nicodemus, or Joseph of Arimathea, or the mother of John Mark.有些人說,這是尼哥底母,還是約瑟夫arimathea ,或母親的約翰馬克。 The hall was large and furnished as a dining-room.大廳是大和家具作為餐廳室。 In it Christ showed Himself after His Resurrection; here took place the election of Matthias to the Apostolate and the sending of the Holy Ghost; here the first Christians assembled for the breaking of bread; hither Peter and John came when they had given testimony after the cure of the man born lame, and Peter after his liberation from prison; here perhaps was the council of the Apostles held.在這基督表明自己後,他的復活;這裡發生的選舉薩默爾向使徒和派遣聖靈;這裡首次基督徒組裝,為打破麵包; hither彼得和約翰來到的時候,他們已經提供證詞之後治愈該名男子出生跛腳,彼得後,他的解放,從監獄中,這裡或許是安理會的使徒舉行。 It was for awhile the only church in Jerusalem, the mother of all churches, known as the Church of the Apostles or of Sion.這是一段時間唯一的教會在耶路撒冷,母親的所有教堂,被稱為教會的使徒們或錫永。 It was visited in 404 by St. Paula of Rome.它是在訪問了404名由聖保拉的羅馬。 In the eleventh century it was destroyed by the Saracens, later rebuilt and given to the care of the Augustinians.在11世紀就被毀掉了,由這部電影,後來改建,並給予照顧的奧古斯丁會士。 Restored after a second destruction, it was placed in charge of the Franciscans, who were driven out in 1561.恢復後,第二次毀滅,這是擺在主管方濟會,他們被趕出在1561年。 At present it is a Moslem mosque.當前最重要的是一個穆斯林清真寺。

SEQUENCE OF EVENTS事件的順序

Some critics give the following harmonized order: washing of the feet of the Apostles, prediction of the betrayal and departure of Judas, institution of the Holy Eucharist.一些批評者給予下列統一命令:清洗雙腳的使徒,預測的背叛,以及離開猶大,機構的聖體聖事。 Others, believing that Judas made a sacrilegious communion, place the institution of the sacrament before the departure of Judas.其他人,認為猶大作出了瀆聖共融,地方院校的聖餐之前離境的猶大。

IN ART在藝術

The Last Supper has been a favourite subject.最後的晚餐一直喜歡的話題。 In the catacombs we find representations of meals giving at least an idea of the surroundings of an ancient dining hall.在地窟裡,我們找到交涉膳食給予至少有一個想法的周圍環境的一個古老的宴會廳。 Of the sixth century we have a bas-relief in the church at Monza in Italy, a picture in a Syrian codex of the Laurentian Library at Florence, and a mosaic in S. Apollmare Nuovo at Ravenna.根據第六世紀,我們有一個BAS的救災,在教會在蒙扎,意大利,在腦海中,一位敘利亞食品法典委員會的項目Laurentian圖書館在佛羅倫薩,並鑲嵌於第apollmare nuovo在拉文納。 One of the most popular pictures is that of Leonardo da Vinci in Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan.其中最流行的圖片是達芬奇在瑪麗亞。德勒grazie ,米蘭。 Among the modern school of German artists, the Last Supper of Gebhardt is regarded as a masterpiece.其中現代學校的德國藝術家,最後的晚餐的gebhardt看作是一項傑作。

Publication information Written by Francis Mershman.出版信息寫弗朗西斯mershman 。 Transcribed by Scott Anthony Hibbs.轉錄斯科特安東尼hibbs 。 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIV.天主教百科全書,體積十四。 Published 1912. 1912年出版。 New York: Robert Appleton Company.紐約:羅伯特Appleton還公司。 Nihil Obstat, July 1, 1912. nihil obstat , 1912年7月1日。 Remy Lafort, STD, Censor.人頭馬lafort ,性病,檢查員。 Imprimatur. imprimatur 。 +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York +約翰farley樞機主教,大主教紐約

Bibliography參考書目

FOUARD, The Christ, the Son of God, tr.富阿爾,基督,是上帝的兒子的TR 。 GRIFFITH, II (London, 1895), 386; MADAME CECILIA, Cath.格里菲斯,第二卷(倫敦, 1895年) , 386 ;夫人塞西,蛋白酶。 Scripture Manuals; St. Matthew, II, 197; The Expository Times, XX (Edinburgh, 1909), 514; Theolog.經文手冊;聖馬太,二中,有197人;闡述倍,第XX (愛丁堡, 1909 ) , 514 ; theolog 。 praktische Quartalschrift (1877), 425; LANGEN, Die letzten Lebenstage Jesu (Freiburg, 1864), 27; KRAUS, Gesch. praktische quartalschrift ( 1877 ) , 425名; langen ,模具letzten lebenstage jesu (弗賴堡, 1864 ) ,第27條; Kraus眼中, gesch 。 der chr.明鏡人權委員會。 Kunst, sv Abendmahl; Stimmen aus Maria Laach, XLIX, 146; CHWOLSON in Mém.藝術, sv abendmahl ; stimmen澳大利亞瑪麗亞laach , xlix , 146條;奇沃爾松在mém 。 de l'Acad.德l' acad 。 impér. impér 。 des Sciences de St. Pétersbourg, 7th ser., XLI, p.萬學德聖pétersbourg 4,7輯,四十一頁 37; VIGOUROUX, Dict. 37 ; vigouroux ,字典。 de la Bible (Paris, 1899), s.德香格里拉聖經(巴黎, 1899年) ,第 vv.維維。 Cène; Cénacle, where a full bibliography may be found. cène ; cénacle ,那裡充滿參考書目可能被找到。


We Received the Following Comment我們收到了以下評論

Subj: Calvinistic Bias on the Lord's Supper subj : calvinistic偏壓對主的晚餐

Dear Friends:親愛的朋友們:

Bias is very difficult to avoid and I am sure that you have done your best.偏見是很難避免,我相信你做你的最好的。 Therefore, I expect you to receive this criticism as something beneficial for your service in educating people on the Christian faith.所以,我希望你接受這種批評,看成是有益的為您服務,在育人對基督教信仰。

On the topic of the Lord's Supper, you use the word, "Consubstantiation" to identify the Lutheran teaching.討論的題目是上主的晚飯,你用一個詞" consubstantiation " ,以確定路德教學。 Lutherans don't use this word to describe their own teaching. lutherans不要使用這個詞來形容自己的教學。 It is rather the Reformed who use it to describe the Lutheran position.這是相當悔改的人用它來形容路德的立場。 It is a misleading word.這是一個誤導性的字眼。 The Lutheran doctrine cares little about whether or not the bread remains bread.路德學說關心不多,有沒有麵包的仍然是麵包。 We simply won't impose a Thomistic (or any other) philosophy on a biblical doctrine.我們絕不會強加thomistic (或任何其他)的哲學對聖經的教義。 I know that it is quite common for the Reformed to use this word to describe the Lutheran teaching, but this does not make it acceptable.我知道這是相當普遍的,為改革,以利用這個詞來形容路德教學,不過,這並不使它可以接受的。 Luther, the Lutheran Confessions, and Lutheran Orthodoxy are far more critical of the view that the Supper is not Christ's true body and blood than they are of the view that the bread and wine have changed.路德,路德的供述中,並路德正統遠遠更具批判性的認為,晚飯,是不是基督的真身體和血比他們都認為,麵包和葡萄酒已發生了變化。

Furthermore, the assertion that Lutherans today are closer to Calvin's view of the real presence than to Luther's view is simply false witness.此外,斷言lutherans今天接近卡爾文的觀點真正存在比路德的看法是完全錯誤的證人。 You really ought to correct this.你真的應該予以糾正。 I am a confessional Lutheran who subscribes without any reservation to the Lutheran Confessions.我是一個自白路德人贊同,沒有任何保留,以路德招供。 Ask your contributors to read our Confessions and then to write articles on our doctrine.請問您貢獻者閱讀我們的自白書,然後寫文章,對我們的教義。 It is unfair to appoint a writing task to one who is ignorant of his topic.這是不公平的,以委任寫作任務,以一個人,是不了解他的話題。 If you would like further information, you may write to me, or to any of the seminary faculties of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod, the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, or the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod.如果您想了解更多信息,你可以寫信給我,或者任何一個修道院院系的基督教香港信義主教,威斯康星州基督教香港信義主教,或路德教會-密蘇里州主教。 Any one of these seminaries would be happy to correct for the benefit of your readers the various articles that are written concering the doctrine of Lutheranism.任何一個這些修院會很樂意為正確的,為幫助你的讀者的各種文章,這些文章都是寫concering中庸路德教。

Thank you for your kind consideration of my criticisms!謝謝你的客氣審議了我的批評!

Sincerely,真誠的,

(Rev.) Rolf D. Preus, pastor (啟示錄)羅爾夫四普羅伊斯,牧師
River Heights Lutheran Church (Evangelical Lutheran Synod)河高地路德教會(基督教香港信義主教)


Editor's Notes編者注

There are some differences between the celebration of the Eucharist in various Churches.也有一些分歧,為慶祝聖體聖事在各個教堂。 For more extensive discussion, including Advanced Information articles, please also see the (Catholic oriented) Mass presentation, linked below.為更廣泛的討論,其中包括先進的資訊文章,也請看到(天主教為主的)大規模的介紹,聯繫下文。

It is generally accepted by Christian scholars that the last meal of Jesus was a (Jewish) Seder meal which is part of the Passover celebration.這是大家普遍認同的,由基督教學者說,最後一頓耶穌是一個(猶太人) seder餐是該慶祝逾越節。 BELIEVE contains a presentation on the Seder which includes the specific foods and procedures involved, along with the Jewish (historic) reasons for them.相信包含了關於seder其中包括具體的食品和所涉及的程序,隨著猶太(歷史的)的原因。 References to Christian adaptations of the Seder are also included.提到基督教調適的seder也包括在內。


The subject is an example of probably around 30 different important Christian subjects where individuals can apply their own preconceptions and assumptions to arrive at their own conclusions.主題就是一個例子,大概30個左右的不同重要基督教科目時,個人可以申請自己的成見和假設,得出自己的結論。 Catholics choose to believe that the bread "actually turns bloody" in the process of eating it, although they agree that there are NO outward signs of it. There is no possible way to argue against such a claim! If you had a dream or a nightmare last night, no one has any possible way of arguing that you did not, because it was a personal experience that cannot be confirmed or disputed by anyone else. So, if Catholics are right about the "becoming bloody" viewpoint, no critic could ever "prove" them wrong but also, they could never "prove" that they are right.天主教徒選擇相信麵包" ,但事實上輪流血腥"在這個過程中的吃,但他們同意,有沒有離港的跡象,它有沒有可能來反對這種索賠!如果你有一個夢,或噩夢昨晚,沒有人有任何可能的方式,認為你沒有,因為這是一個個人經驗,無法確認或有爭議的,由其他人,所以,如果天主教徒都說得對, "成為血腥"的角度來看,並沒有影評人可以往"證明"他們是錯誤的,而且,他們可從來沒有"證明"說,他們是正確的。

Luther, and Calvin, and others, each felt that this was an illogical conclusion, and, more specifically, that the Bible does not clearly support the "bloody" interpretation. Some Protestants came to conclude that the bread was "merely symbolic" of the Lord, while others (following Luther) felt it really became the Lord, but in a non-bloody way.路德,卡爾文和其他人,每個不滿,認為這是一個符合邏輯的結論,而且,更具體地說,即聖經沒有明確支持"血腥"的解釋, 一些新教徒來到得出結論認為,麵包是"純粹的象徵"的主,而其他人(以下路德)認為,它真的成了上帝,但在一個不流血的方式。

No one can either "prove" or "disprove" any of these viewpoints either. 沒有人可以"證明"或"反證"上述任何一種觀點。

It is a subject on which there can never be agreement! Each group has applied their own preconceptions and assumptions and decided on a specific conclusion/interpretation. Since the Bible does not include sufficient details to tell that one or another is more correct, they each should be considered "equally correct" (personal opinion), and therefore totally valid FOR THAT GROUP. 這是一個議題,這點大家都不會同意!各組已申請自己的成見和假設,並決定對一個具體的結論/口譯, 因為聖經沒有包括足夠的細節看出一個或另一個是比較正確的話,他們每人應被視為"同樣正確"的 (個人意見) ,因此完全適用於該集團。 Therefore, we see no cause or basis to criticize Catholics for their conclusion regarding Transubstantiation.因此,我們看不到有任何原因或基礎,以批評天主教徒,為他們的結論就陷於變體說。 But we also see no cause or basis to criticize Zwingli et al for a purely symbolic understanding.但我們也看到,沒有任何原因或依據批評zwingli等人,為一個純粹的象徵性的理解。

Our Church feels that such arguments are pretty much irrelevant. What REALLY is important is how the Eucharist is perceived by and affects the specific person that partakes in it. If a person simply eats it, as a mundane piece of bread, it has no merit, in ANY Church!我們的教會認為,這種論調是非常不重要。 才是真正重要的是如何聖體聖事是所察覺 ,並影響特定人士表示,參與大,因為如果一個人根本吃它,作為一個世俗的一塊麵包,它沒有任何好處在任何教會! However, if the person's heart is deeply affected by the Rite (the REAL desire of the Lord), then it is valid, no matter what the opinions on interpretation might be.但是,如果人的心是深深受到了成年禮(真實願望主)的話,那就是有效的,無論有什麼意見,對解釋可能。

We have a rather different thought to offer up on the subject!我們有一個相當不同的思路提供了關於這一主題! Modern science has proven that there are an unbelievable number of atoms in even a small amount of any liquid or solid (Avogadro's number).現代科學已經證明,有一個令人難以置信的數量的原子,甚至少量的任何液體或固體(阿伏伽德羅的號碼) 。 If there is a cup of coffee on your desk, or a glass of pop, or a Ritz cracker, or a candy bar, there are something like 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms in it.如果有一個喝咖啡對你的案頭,還是玻璃的流行音樂,還是麗嘉裂解,或是糖果酒吧,有一些像100000000000000000000000原子中的。 When Jesus Lived, He breathed!當耶穌住了,他吹了! Every breath He exhaled had water vapor in it and carbon dioxide, atoms and molecules that HAD BEEN PART OF HIS BODY.每呼氣他呼出了水汽在它和二氧化碳,原子和分子已被他的部分身體。 A number of years back, I studied this subject carefully.數年前,我在研究這個課題小心。 The winds of the world distribute such air, including those molecules, all around the world, within a couple years.風的世界散佈這些空氣,包括那些分子,在世界各地,一對夫婦年。 As a wheat plant is growing in Kansas, it takes in carbon dioxide and water vapor from the air, which then become part of that plant!作為小麥的植物是生長在堪薩斯州,它的二氧化碳和水蒸氣,從空中,然後成為部分,即植物! The point here is that some of those molecules had actually been part of the Body of Jesus 2000 years earlier!這一點在此指出的是某些人的分子已實際身體的一部分耶穌2000年早些時候! I did the math on this, and was amazed!我本來數學就這個問題,感到十分詫異! Every mouthful of that coffee certainly contains around a MILLION atoms that had once physically been part of the Body of Jesus!每一口咖啡,當然包含約100萬原子曾一度身體被身體的一部分耶穌! Similar for crackers or candy bars!類似餅乾或糖塊!

This is really an entirely different subject, but it certainly is an established fact.這實在是一個完全不同的問題,但毫無疑問,這是一個既定的事實。 I see it as sort of affecting such arguments regarding the Nature of the Eucharist.我看這是排序的影響這種論調對於大自然的聖體聖事。 If someone wanted to think that the million atoms that ACTUALLY had been part of the Body of Jesus were "bloody", I cannot really argue against that, because some/most of those atoms certainly had been His blood and His flesh.如果有人要以為這是萬原子實際上已被部分的是耶穌的身體被"血腥" ,我真的不能反駁這點,因為有些/大多數這些原子當然一直是他的血和肉。 However, if a different person would choose to look at that coffee as more "symbolic", well that is also sort of true!但是,如果一個不同的人會選擇看那個咖啡隨著越來越多的"象徵性" ,那麼這也是一種真!

This is brought up to try to show that "arguments" on "human important perceptions" are probably not really very important.這是帶來了嘗試表明, "論據" , "人重要的看法: "也許不是真的很重要。 Also, that you might look at EVERY piece of bread, and meat, and vegetable, and every glass of any liquid, in a new light!另外,你可能看每一塊麵包,肉類,蔬菜,都被玻璃的任何液體,在新的光芒! With the proper mind-set, I believe, one could see that EVERY bite of food and every sip of liquid is arguably "of Christ" in a VERY direct way!與適當的心理定勢,我相信,人們可以看到,每一口食物都SIP的液體可以說是"基督"的一個非常直接的方式! Instead of just sucking down a Pepsi, look at it for a moment, and contemplate these facts.而不是只吸了百事可樂,看它一會兒,沉思了這些事實。 I have a VERY large number of "religious experiences" in this way!我有一個非常大的數目, "宗教經驗" ,這種方式!

Some Christians might get upset over the molecule discussion above.有些基督徒可能獲得超過底價分子從以上討論。 NO, it is NOT meant as any replacement for Faith perceptions of the Eucharist!不,這是不是意味著作為任何更換為信仰的看法,聖體聖事! It is NOT to imply that Faith perceptions are incorrect or incomplete.這是不是意味著信仰的看法是不正確或不完整。 Just the reverse!剛剛扭轉! Our small Church encourages all Members to spend a few seconds contemplating the wafer or bread about to be taken in the Eucharist Rite, in order to realize, in ADDITION to the Faith importance as described by their Church, the ACTUAL FACT that they are looking at and about to ingest ACTUAL PHYSICAL PARTS of the Body of Jesus!我們的小教堂鼓勵所有成員花了幾秒鐘繼續研究晶圓片麵包或即將採取的聖體聖事禮儀,為了實現好,除了信仰的重要性,形容他們的教會,但事實上,他們正在尋找在即將攝取的實際身體部分的耶穌! Personally, I often get a shiver, in realizing just how intimately Jesus is to me in that Rite!以我個人而言,往往得到顫栗,在實現公正,如何關係密切,耶穌是我在這成年禮! We hope that is also true among the Congregation!我們希望,也確實之間眾!


Newer Additional Comments (Nov 2005) by the Editor of BELIEVE.新的補充意見( 2005年11月)所編輯的相信。

I sometimes wonder how Members of the Clergy might act if they were to interact with Jesus Himself, without realizing it!有時我什至懷疑有多少成員神職人員可能採取行動,如果他們能夠順利與耶穌本人,沒有實現它! Several Lutheran Ministers have behaved to us in extremely poor ways on this subject!幾個路德部長們不乖,我們在極其惡劣的方式就此事! And after an initial mean-spirited e-mail that accuses BELIEVE of being an adversary of Lutheranism, often with amazingly harsh language, I have always assured them that BELIEVE is NOT "against Lutheranism" and in fact always wants to improve any of the 1300 class=qxt>This subject presentation in the original English language本主題介紹在原來的英文


Send an e-mail question or comment to us: E-mail發送電子郵件的問題或意見給我們:電子郵箱

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at主要相信網頁(和索引科目),是在
usually asking for their assistance in improving this particular presentation.經過初步的意思昂揚的電子郵件指控,相信會被敵方的路德教,往往是令人驚訝的苛刻語言,我總是對他們保證,相信她是不是"對路德教" ,並在事實上總是要改善的任何1300主題演講中認為,這可能不準確或不完整的,而且通常要求他們協助改善這種特別介紹。 A Lutheran Minister just reacted to that request by saying that he didn't see any reason that he should have to do our research! 1路德部長只是做出了自然反應這一請求,他說,他不認為有任何理由認為他應該做我們的研究! OK!確定! That's fine, but without any cooperation from Lutheran Ministry, it is hard for a non-Lutheran (a Non-Denominational Protestant Pastor) to truly learn Lutheran attitudes.這很好,但沒有任何合作,由香港信義部,這是很難一個非路德(非教派新教牧師) ,以真正了解路德的態度。

I will attempt to describe the issue, as best I understand it.我將嘗試描述此問題,我要盡自己的理解。

As far as we can find from research, the word Consubstantiation has absolutely no other usage other than to supposedly describe the Lutheran belief regarding the Eucharist.據我們能夠找到從科研,字consubstantiation已絕對沒有其他的用途以外,以假定形容路德信仰有關聖體聖事。 However, Lutheran Clergy seem to go ballistic regarding the very existence of the word!然而,路德派牧師,似乎去彈道就存在的字眼! Now, if the "definition" of the word Consubstantiation is inaccurate, I could easily see why Lutherans would want to correct it.現在,只要把兩岸"定義"這個詞consubstantiation是不準確的話,我可以很容易看到為什麼lutherans將要糾正它。 But that has never been their interest, in dozens of Lutheran Clergy who have complained about the above (scholar-written) articles.但從來沒有自己的利益,在幾十個路德派牧師的人都抱怨以上(學者撰寫)的文章。 They always are intensely outraged (and most very clearly express extreme outrage!) at the very word itself!他們往往是在激烈憤怒(和大部分很清楚的表示極端的憤慨! ) ,在很一詞本身! In every case, I have calmly tried to ask why, and none have ever responded to that question.在任何情況下,我曾冷靜地試圖要問為什麼,並沒有以往回應這個問題。

That attitude COULD make sense, IF the word Consubstantiation had some second meaning, a usage where the meaning is clearly different from Lutheran belief regarding the Eucharist.這種態度可以理解,如果單詞consubstantiation了一些的第二個意義,而使用的含義顯然是不同信仰路德教關於聖體聖事。 No Lutheran Clergy has never indicated that there is any other such usage.沒有路德會神職人員從來沒有表示有任何其他這種用法。

This then seems REALLY confusing to me!這就好像真的混淆了我! At this point in each communication, I usually refer to the word "mousepad", which, as far as I know, only has a single usage, that little area on which a computer mouse moves around.在這一點上,在每一個溝通,我通常是指用" mousepad " ,其中,據我所知,只有一個單一的用法,即小面積上電腦鼠標動作左右。 If someone became intensely emotionally irritated by the word "mousepad", I would wonder why.如果有人成為緊鑼密鼓惱怒情緒一詞由" mousepad "時,我會想知道為什麼。 With no other know usage, WHATEVER the definition of that word is, it MUST have something to do with a mouse and moving it around!不知道其他的用途,無論定義這個詞的是,它必須也要與鼠標移動它靠近! So even if a definition was considered inaccurate, doesn't it make more sense to attempt to refine the definition to being more correct than to become abusive and mean-spirited because the word mousepad was used?因此,即使一個定義被認為是不準確的,沒有它,使更多的責任感,以試圖重新定義,以更正確的,比成為辱罵,並指一種昂揚的精神狀態,因為這個詞mousepad用?

In my interactions with Lutheran Ministers on this one subject, I have started to wonder how well they have their acts together!在我的互動與路德部長們就這一個議題,我已經開始懷疑有多少,以及他們自己的行為,共同發展! Some have insisted that, yes, Luther described this view, but later abandoned it, and yes, Melanchthon first used that word but also later refuted it completely.有些人堅持說,是的,路德形容這種看法,但後來放棄了它,是的,梅蘭希頓首次使用這個詞,但後來也駁斥它完全。 Does this mean that Lutheran beliefs today are not compatible with what Luther had believed as he initiated the Protestant Reformation?這是否意味著路德信仰今天不兼容什麼路德曾經相信,因為他倡導了新教改革嗎? (seems like a fair question). (好像一個公平的問題) 。 Other Lutheran Clergy have "announced" to me that Luther had never used such a word (which is true!) and that it first was used around 60 years later, around 1590.其他路德會神職人員" ,宣布"我認為路德從來沒有用了這樣一個詞(這是真的! ) ,並認為它首先是用大約60年後的今天,第1590左右。 Yet other Lutheran Clergy insist that the word Consubstantiation was used (either 100 or 200 years) before Luther, and some of those claims say that Scotus first used it.不過,其他路德派牧師堅持說,字consubstantiation用(無論是100還是200年)之前,路德,和某些人的債權說scotus首次使用它。 But none have ever provided BELIEVE with actual texts of any of these things, and instead only refer to MODERN Lutheran texts.但還沒有提供任何時候都相信,以實際文本的任何這些東西,而不是只指現代路德文本。 The standards of BELIEVE are such that that is not good enough!該標準的,相信這樣的說明,這是不足夠的! If we are to dump the work of a highly respected Christian scholar (our included texts), we would need REALLY good evidence and documentation!如果我們要傾倒的工作,一位德高望重的基督教學者(包括我國文本) ,我們需要真正好的證據和文件!

Even if someone used that specific word prior to Luther, that does not necessarily mean that it did or didn't mean the same thing.甚至如果有人利用這特定的單詞之前,路德,這並不一定意味著它還是並不意味著同一件事。 The word "mouse" has been around for thousands of years, but never referred to any part of a computer until twenty years ago!用"鼠標"已經千百年來,但從未提及任何部分的電腦,直到二十年前! Should we read a Shakespeare mention of a mouse with outrage, in not properly also referring to the computer?我們應該閱讀莎士比亞提的鼠標與憤慨,在沒有妥善亦指電腦嗎?

In any case, all we want are actual facts.在任何情況下,所有我們希望是客觀事實。 Except for these aberrant Lutheran Clergy Members, we actually strongly support the Lutheran Church and wish to improve BELIEVE to better present their beliefs.除了這些異常路德派牧師的成員來說,我們確實強烈支持路德教會,並希望改善相信,以更好地介紹他們的信仰。 But, regarding this one word, Consubstantiation, they seem to immediately get angry and vengeful and go into attack-mode, without (yet) ever providing actual evidence (not counting recent articles of their peers) which is what we actually need.但是,對於這一個字, consubstantiation ,他們似乎馬上讓憤怒和報復,並進入攻擊模式,但無(但)以往任何時候都提供實際的證據(不包括近期文章的同儕) ,而這正是我們真正需要的人。 For example, if Scotus actually used the term Consubstantiation, we would just need the name of the book and the page number, so we could research the context in which the word was used.舉例來說,如果scotus實際利用任期consubstantiation ,我們只需要的名義,這本書和頁碼,所以我們可以研究的上下文中使用該詞。

This subject presentation in the original English language本主題介紹在原來的英文


Send an e-mail question or comment to us: E-mail發送電子郵件的問題或意見給我們:電子郵箱

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at主要相信網頁(和索引科目),是在