dr_parsley
Puritan Board Freshman
Contra_Mundum said:I would say that insisting on the "unleavened" part, anyplace, is going beyond the plain teaching of Scripture. I can't say that I think Jesus had unleavened bread in mind for his church, perpetually, on the night when he instituted the LS.
...
I do think that Jesus had "red wine" in mind for his church, perpetually.
Contra_Mundum said:I think "red" is demonstrative of the shed blood of Jesus, which it represents, so I wouldn't want "white wine."
And unleavened bread is demonstrative of his sinlessness. It seems to me there should be a difficulty in holding that the redness of the wine was a symbol intended by Jesus and the unleavenness of the bread was not. On what grounds can you do that? Either both are essential (if possible in ones context) or neither are.
My own preferred practice is actually the same as yours but my reasons are less principled - I like red wine and I don't like unleavened bread! I was recently interested to read Celsus' "On The True Doctrine" and the descriptions of the early Christians "love feasts" shows a quite different character to the discussion on this thread and I wonder if we've got it right at all on a more fundamental level to that of unleavened/leavened and red/white/juice.