Posted on 10/27/2014 5:43:10 AM PDT by Gamecock
Does this mean that there are no non-metaphorical uses? No.
Or are you claiming that every time the word 'eat' is used, it must be being used metaphorically, because it is used metaphorically at least once?
If "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life" was merely a metaphor then why did many of Christ's disciples desert him?
Jesus's words shocked those who heard them. His disciples certainly understood His words as statements meant to be taken literally, and many rejected them.
His disciples left in droves. Why did they do this if Christ was speaking in metaphor?
Jesus offered no apologies or corrections. Instead He turned to His remaining disciples and asked if they wished to leave too.
Now we face the same choice. Are we going to leave Christ?
He humbly offers Himself as our food and our drink. Will we take Him at his Word?
Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
That is not the reaction to a metaphor. This is the stark, amazed, horrified reaction to Christ's command that His disciples must eat His Body and drink His Blood.
As previously discussed: many of His disciples could not bear this hard teaching. They demurred: but Christ stood by His words. He did not retract or clarify them.
And then they left Him, unable to reconcile themselves to His stark and obvious meaning. Again, why would they do that if the command to eat His Body and drink His Blood was mere metaphor?
Sincerely hope this was helpful.
May Jesus Christ lead us into all truth. Amen.
You best refresh your memory of the criteria for choosing a replacement for judas.
No man today qualifies. There is no further apostolic succession.
Please show that from scripture. Christ said He was talking spiritually not literally.
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
>>His disciples left in droves. Why did they do this if Christ was speaking in metaphor?<<
They thought that He was talking of literal flesh and blood like Catholics do. They knew that eating blood was breaking the law.
>>Jesus offered no apologies or corrections.<<
I just showed where He did.
>>Will we take Him at his Word?<<
Catholics surely don't. Jesus clearly said His words were spiritual not literal and that the flesh "prophiteth nothing".
That's right it isn't. They misunderstood just like Catholics and didn't stay around for when Jesus explained. Jesus waited to explain to just those who really trusted Him. Those who trusted Him knew that He wouldn't cause them to break the law.
>>He did not retract or clarify them.<<
Once again, He most certainly did. He said those who left were not His true followers anyway. He waited till they left to explain to those whose really trusted and believed in Him. Those who are not His today still deny His explanation.
Yes! Good! You agree that this is what they thought. Right or wrong, they believed that Christ wasn't speaking in metaphor. His teaching shocked them into leaving. They could not accept it.
But: you believe that Christ was somehow hinting at metaphor?
If that were true, why did they leave? Did Christ just not do a very good job of explaining His meaning?
Lets look at His words. Remember that He responds to the stark unbelief of his audience not once but twice.
Christ said this to the disciples:
I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
And the Jews argued among themselves saying:
“How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
Then Jesus said to them
Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.
Does that sound like metaphor? For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink?
Carrying on to the second statement of unbelief:
On hearing it, many of his disciples said,
This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?
Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them,
Does this offend you? Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words that I have spoken unto you, they are Spirit, and they are Life
I repeat: Christ backs up His words by saying that they are Spirit and they are Life.
At this point his audience could only have understood that Christ was standing behind his earlier words. Jesus made no changes to His words, no clarifications - because none were needed.
Now - according to your version - this is the moment when the faithful disciples were able to parse Christ's words - realizing that when He stated that His words were 'Spirit and Life' and that "His flesh was real food and His blood was real drink" that this meant that they didn't have to take them seriously.
But the unfaithful disciples left - because why? Because - according to you - they didn't understand that He was speaking metaphorically? Christ let them walk away without explaining His meaning?
That would be insane. Christ is not some kind of divine Clinton whose words are not supposed to be taken literally, especially when He most insists on them.
Christ stood by His words. He declared them to be Spirit and Life. He declared that His flesh was real food and His blood was real drink.
No-one who heard Him was in any doubt that He meant what He said. His disciples left Him because He wasn't speaking metaphorically.
There are simply no other ways to take the John 6 narrative. Like those people in Capernaum we must accept that Christ literally means for us to eat His Flesh and drink His Blood.
Sincerely hope this was helpful.
May Jesus Christ lead us into all truth. Amen.
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.
St Paul is in no doubt that the Eucharist is the Lord's Body
Hope this is helpful.
May Jesus Christ lead us into all truth. Amen.
Let's clarify that. They thought Christ was speaking of literal flesh and blood like Catholics do and they knew it would be breaking the law. Catholics evidently don't understand that.
>>Now - according to your version - this is the moment when the faithful disciples were able to parse Christ's words -<<
No, I didn't say that. I said that they trusted Christ enough to know that He would not be asking them to break the law and there had to be some explanation.
>>Christ let them walk away without explaining His meaning?<<
Christ let them walk away knowing they had not been called by the Father.
“This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”
It stands that if that was real flesh and blood Christ and the apostles broke the law against eating blood.
What is the "body of Christ"?
1 Corinthians 12:27 Now you are Christ's body, and individually members of it.
Both the Catholic`s and the reformers have did their job so why not see it for what it really is.
God had to get the attention of the world, other wise how could the gospel be preached to the world?
Mathew 24
14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
The Catholic Church and later on the reformers was the tools God used in his thousand year reign here on earth to get the attention of the world and they did get it, through one means or another.
John 8
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
But how could God judge any one who was not free to determine the meaning of the scripture for them selves?
After all if a man or woman is likely to get their heads chopped off for not obeying orders even if the orders are wrong is God going to judge them or is he going to see what they do after they are free to decide for them selves?
So the attention of the world was gained but now the truth had to be preached so that every one could be judged fairly, hence the reformation.
But men being what men are the reformers had to make them selves look more important in them selves rather than realizing they were just the tools that God was using( no different than the Catholic Church )
So today they each one is saying ( here is the mountain, or here is the rock)
Rev 6
16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?
Even though people now know the truth they still want to hide behind a religion, thinking it will hide them from the wrath of god.
Revelation 18
4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
You can find some truth in any Church and a lot in others but your faith has to be in Jesus and his words, not in some one else`s interpretation if it be the Pope or Luther or Calvin.
They are just tools and should not be worshipped.
Your version of Christ declares that 'His Body and Blood is real food and real drink' - and then watches as the people who take Him at His word walk away?
But the ones who decide that Christ doesn't mean what He is saying - that there must be some special meaning that Christ is reserving just for them - they are obviously members of the elect?
"Well done, I laid a trap for those other guys - but you guys passed!" - is that it?
And these same disciples who know just when to judiciously disbelieve Christ - don't forget that some of them were at the Last Supper.
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my Body."
In your version of events, do they eat what Christ claims is His Body on the strict understanding that Christ is just laying some kind of trap?
But St Paul wasn't let in on the joke, so he writes about the Lord's Body?
And we mustn't forget that St Paul also writes:
Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ?
St Paul clearly understands that Christ gives us His Body and Blood to eat. In this He is at odds with your Clintonian distortion of Christ - but in complete agreement with the actual Christ.
The disciples trusted Jesus when He said He would give them His Body to eat. They didn't trust that he was lying. They trusted that He was telling the truth.
For as they said: "To whom shall we go? You have the Words of Eternal Life"
It stands that if that was real flesh and blood Christ and the apostles broke the law against eating blood.
Not if they are eating and drinking the living body and blood of God Almighty. Remember that Jesus is the Lamb of God: for as St Paul writes:
Christ, our Passover Lamb, has been sacrificed for us
The Jews were commanded to eat the Passover Lamb. How then could eating the Passover Lamb be against the law?
When we eat Christ we fulfill the Mosaic Law. We do not break it, and Christ is not asking us to.
Hope this was helpful.
May Christ lead us into all truth. Amen.
Catholics, though, keep splitting of heresies itself.
It's worth clarifying this point. Remember that St Paul writes this earlier in the same letter:
Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.
Because of the Eucharist, we are one. The Lord's Supper does not celebrate our oneness: it creates our oneness. We are part of Christ's body because we eat Christ's body.
I didn’t say the OT said these words did I?
Quote from post-
The Bible alone is our ultimate authority—not the pope, not the church, not
the traditions of the church or church councils, still less personal intimations or subjective feelings, but Scripture only
Except that a pope named Gregory now is the system of timekeeping for the world,especially christendom,both mom and daughters. (Heck, even Jews, Muslims and atheist use it)
It sets Christendom’s ‘holy days’ of December 25, good friya (a goddess) day and easter sun’s day which are nowhere in scripture.
Sola Popa instead of Sola Scriptura may be alive and well in the very work and worship life of each christian without them even thinking about it..
Prophetic..
It's certainly true that Christ's gift of His Body and Blood is prefigured in the manna from heaven, and even more strongly in the Passover Lamb.
But Christ says something new here. Something which is indeed prefigured in the OT, but which is so shocking that it drives most of His disciples away.
So shocking in fact that it is not believed even today by most of those who seek to follow Him.
"This is a hard saying. Who can bear it?"
“Except that a pope named Gregory now is the system of timekeeping for the world,especially christendom,both mom and daughters. (Heck, even Jews, Muslims and atheist use it)”
I’ve got no problem with a dead pope setting the standard for time-keeping... thanks for sharing.
No I did not even come close to saying that. Jesus and the disciples and Paul constantly referred to OT scripture and expanded on it to show how Jesus fulfilled the law.
Christ’s followers thought is a hard saying because it was obvious he was pointing to himself as superior to the temporal manna provided in the wilderness by Moses. They were not willing to acknowledge Christ as superior to Jewish law.
What they actually said was: Can this man give us His flesh to eat?
That was their sticking point. Not that Christ declared anything about the Jewish law, but that He said "Eat My Body and Drink My Blood".
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.