Church of Scotland minister says to teach Jesus died for sins is "ghastly theology"

“It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” (John 6:63)

With this one verse, Jesus Christ completely denied the “transubstantial” sense of His Words. The flesh profits nothing. He as much tells us that His Words were meant to be taken figuratively - and that sets the parameters for all further intepretation on this subject appearing later in the epistles.

Indeed, we should observe that the disciples who turned back and left Him were the ones who thought He was literally telling them to eat His flesh and drink His blood. The ones who stayed faithful were the ones who understood that He was speaking spiritually and figuratively.

And this isn’t even getting into the theme that appears across Scripture of “eating the Word of God” that is always elsewhere used in a symbolic or figurative sense.

So ... the Protestant position on this is that Christ deliberately lied to his disciples to see which ones of them would have enough faith to recognize that he was lying?

That's not Christ. That's Clinton.

Many of his disciples deserted Christ because they could not accept His teaching about His Body and Blood. And when they began to leave, Christ didn't amend or clarify His words - instead He confirmed that He did indeed mean them to eat His Body and drink His Blood.

The faithful disciples (however) stayed with Christ because they recognized that He was the Son of the living God. They were the first to eat His Body and drink His Blood at the Last Supper.

So ... the Protestant position on this is that Christ deliberately lied to his disciples to see which ones of them would have enough faith to recognize that he was lying?

Since I'm not Protestant, I can't speak to the Protestant position. However, the BIBLE position is that Christ knew that (unlike modern Catholics, apparently) His disciples would be familiar enough with the Old Testament concepts surrounding "eating the Word of God" as it was found in some of the prophets that He could rightly expect them to understand that He was speaking figuratively.

In other words, He was assuming tacit knowledge and the ability to systematically comprehend what He said in light of previous Scripture.

Christ commands us to eat His Body and Blood. His words are unmistakable.

Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

Christ literally gives Himself to us as real food and real drink. There's nothing to misinterpret here. There's no room for manoeuvre.

Moreover: when we consider the language used in the Gospel of John, the literal interpretation becomes undeniable.

In John 6:50-53 Christ's words are translated using various forms of the Greek verb phago, 'eating.' As in 'Sarcophagus'.

However after the Jews begin to express incredulity at the idea of eating Christ’s flesh, His language intensified.

In verse 54, John begins to use trogo instead of phago. Trogo is a decidedly more graphic term, meaning 'to chew on' or to 'gnaw on'—as when an animal is ripping apart its prey. The text is closer to:

Whoever gnaws on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.

If anything more needed to be said: St Paul - who you'll agree was amply versed in the Hebrew scriptures - is very clear on the nature of the sacrament.

Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup.

For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

Not to mention Christ's institution of what we now call the Eucharist at the Last Supper.

From Luke:

And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."

Well, I hope this was helpful. I have a client coming over so I will go finish some code. God bless, and good night to all here.

“The so-called “Revd Scott McKenna” is not a ‘reverend’”.

In fact, no man that is called “Reverend” really is. The word appears only once in the whole Bible, and it refers to God.

Psalms 111:9 He sent redemption unto his people; he hath commanded his covenant for ever; holy and reverend is his name.

How dare any mortal call himself “Reverend”!

He reads the Bible like the Supreme Court reads the constitution.

It’s a “living document” and changes with the ignorance, will, sin, and opinions of the “superior” modern readers who want to repeat all the errors of the past which the Bible and on a much smaller level, the constitution, set out to document and remedy.

Liberals place themselves above the founders of the United States who were inspired by God to create a free Christian Nation, and they go directly to the Bible to place themselves above God. They are the termites of civilization and mankind. Heaven help us.

I have a friendly acquaintance who was an Episcopal “priest” who told me of becoming a Christian after almost forty years of “priesthood.” He is now a pastor in the reformed Anglican movement, which strikes me as the Christian rebellion against the pagan Episcopal coven. My friend told me that far fewer than 5% of Episcopal “priests” are believers, and even fewer of the bishops. IIRC he knew of only one Episcopal bishop who was a Christian. And that bishop led his entire conference out of the Episcopal “church.”

Thanks for your very revealing post #50. Hearing that makes me feel very sad, perhaps somewhat like what Nehemiah must have felt when he learned of Jerusalem's devastation (Neh. 1:3-4):

"They said to me, "Those who survived the exile and are back in the province are in great trouble and disgrace. The wall of Jerusalem is broken down, and its gates have been burned with fire." When I heard these things, I sat down and wept. For some days I mourned and fasted and prayed before the God of heaven."

But I do not despair, for I know God remains on His throne, and I see innumerable examples of His continuing sovereignty, including those you mentioned, the priest and the bishop.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.