On taking John 6 literally

triablogue ^ | October 16, 2005 | Steve

[RnMomof7]

On taking John 6 literally

Roman Catholics claim to take Jn 6 literally, unlike the Baptists. But what exactly does it mean to take Jn 6 literally, and who is more literal, the Catholic or the Baptist?

1.Here is what I take a literal interpretation of Jn 6 to mean. Some time around the year AD 30 or so, Jesus performed three nature miracles (the multiplication of food, walking on water, stilling the storm) situated on or about (the E. shore of) the Sea of Galilee.

The next day, in a synagogue located in Capernaum, on the NW shore of the Sea of Galilee, a debate took place between Jesus and the Jews, prior to the Last Supper, centering on a comparison and a contrast between Jesus and the manna in the wilderness.

2.What does a “literal” Catholic reading of Jn 6 amount to? They treat Jn 6 as an allegory of the Mass. What it symbolizes is what takes place whenever the Mass is celebrated, every day, in different parts of the world.

They justify this anachronistic and allegorical interpretation on the grounds that they deny the historicity of the original setting and substitute, in its place, a sitz-im-leben supplied by the life of the Johannine community at the tail-end of the 1C or so, residing in Asia Minor or Shangri-la. By “they,” I mean the standard Catholic commentators on John like Ray Brown and Rudolf Schnackenburg.

3.There is also a striking difference in how a Catholic and a Baptist defines a true body. For a Baptist, the true body of Christ would be the same sort of body—indeed, the very same body—as we see on display in the Gospels and Acts (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39-40,42-43; Jn 20:17,20,24-29; Acts 1:4; 10:41).

This would be the visible, tangible body of a 1C Palestinian Jewish man, of a certain height and weight—a body that you and I would recognize for what it is.

For a Catholic, however, the true body of Christ is an invisible, intangible, unrecognizable entity hidden beneath the species of bread and wine.

One can’t help noticing that the way in which a Catholic defines the true body and real presence of Christ bears a startling resemblance to those millennial cults (e.g., Millerites, Campingites, J-Dubs, hyperpreterists) which predict the visible, bodily return of Christ, only to redraw the terms of fulfillment when their prediction fails to materialize. They assure us that Christ really did return, and is truly is present with his people, but you just can’t see him, that’s all. He actually did come back in AD 70…or was it 1844?…or was it 1914?…or was it 1994?

[RnMomof7]

ping

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

John 6

60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?

61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?

62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

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.

64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

[knarf]

Off to a real place to hear real words spoken by a real man attempting to get through our thick skulls the reality of a real God ...

Goin' to my Baptist church to hear some PREACHIN' .... get my weekly brain washing

Read the news ... YOU'LL need at least a rinsing just from allowing those words on the surface of your brain

Thanx, Mom ... will respond later this afternoon

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

The Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano

Ancient Anxanum, the city of the Frentanese, has contained for over twelve centuries the first and greatest Eucharistic Miracle of the Catholic Church. This wondrous Event took place in the 8th century A.D. in the little Church of St. Legontian, as a divine response to a Basilian monk's doubt about Jesus' Real Presence in the Eucharist.

During Holy Mass, after the two-fold consecration, the host was changed into live Flesh and the wine was changed into live Blood, which coagulated into five globules, irregular and differing in shape and size.

The Host-Flesh, as can be very distinctly observed today, has the same dimensions as the large host used today in the Latin church; it is light brown and appears rose-colored when lighted from the back.

The Blood is coagulated and has an earthy color resembling the yellow of ochre.

Various ecclesiastical investigation ("Recognitions") were conducted since 1574.

In 1970-'71 and taken up again partly in 1981 there took place a scientific investigation by the most illustrious scientist Prof. Odoardo Linoli, eminent Professor in Anatomy and Pathological Histology and in Chemistry and Clinical Microscopy. He was assisted by Prof. Ruggero Bertelli of the University of Siena.

The analyses were conducted with absolute and unquestionable scientific precision and they were documented with a series of microscopic photographs. These analyses sustained the following conclusions:

•The Flesh is real Flesh. The Blood is real Blood.

•The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.

•The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart.

•In the Flesh we see present in section: the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium.

•The Flesh is a "HEART" complete in its essential structure.

•The Flesh and the Blood have the same blood-type: AB (Blood-type identical to that which Prof. Baima Bollone uncovered in the Holy Shroud of Turin).

•In the Blood there were found proteins in the same normal proportions (percentage-wise) as are found in the sero-proteic make-up of the fresh normal blood.

•In the Blood there were also found these minerals: chlorides, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, sodium and calcium.

•The preservation of the Flesh and of the Blood, which were left in their natural state for twelve centuries and exposed to the action of atmospheric and biological agents, remains an extraordinary phenomenon.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

St. Paul

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep [i.e., died].

[Resettozero]

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

Understanding which disciples left Him and which 12 remained in spite of this hard saying of Jesus, depends on which of the spirits is being followed, and whether a disciple loves Jesus or merely knows about Him.

(Where else are we going to go?)

[don-o]

I have seen where moderators, in the past, have exposed who posted what in keywords. How about sharing who posted “cannibalism” as a keyword?

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Article 3, The Sacrement of the Eucharist

1336 The first announcement of the Eucharist divided the disciples, just as the announcement of the Passion scandalized them: "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?"

The Eucharist and the Cross are stumbling blocks. It is the same mystery and it never ceases to be an occasion of division.

"Will you also go away?": the Lord's question echoes through the ages, as a loving invitation to discover that only he has "the words of eternal life" and that to receive in faith the gift of his Eucharist is to receive the Lord himself.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Yes. As the Catechism says, “The Eucharist and the Cross are stumbling blocks. It is the same mystery and it never ceases to be an occasion of division.”

[goodwithagun]

Maybe it means Christians attacking other Christians? Meanwhile, islam advances. Regardless of what this blog claims, I’m off to Mass. Peace be with you and the missus.

[don-o]

Of course, it’s a charge that the first haters of the Church made. It would be instructive to know exactly who is throwing in with that bunch.

[Nifster]

since when is allegory literal????

[Burkianfrombrklyn]

Yes, I agree. This post is defensive and a bit confusing - the idea of this post that the true presence of John 6 is the “allegory” and that simply saying the Gospels mean a generic “symbol” is the literal meaning - it seems weak at best. Overall, the problem, in my opinion, that people have with John 6 is that to acknowledge the Eucharist is to re-think the necessity of the sacrifice of Our Lord as done in the mass. It goes to the heart of “the Elect” as already been selected, so therefore no sacrifice of the Eucharist can ever save a soul, to the Catholic idea that all can be saved, and the sacrifice is the help save the living and the dead. Luther specifically hated the concept of praying for “the quick and the dead” as an offense to God. But heck, I’m just glad people are going to church, Baptist etc. So, thus the struggle to undo not only the plain words of Our Lord, but even worse, have to undo those who walked with him and those in the immediate next generation — somehow they wrong about John 6, and then somehow in the 1800s God graced us by saying “you know, it’s just a symbol.” (Even Luther believed in the real presence, albeit in a different form)

[sayfer bullets]

Interesting thoughts all...

I suppose the Lord would prefer we discuss, even if by lack of agreement, His Word above many other topics that occupy our time.

and just curious...must either 1 or 2 be false as the other is true? I may lack intellectual grounding here...just an observer.

[RnMomof7]

I have seen where moderators, in the past, have exposed who posted what in keywords. How about sharing who posted “cannibalism” as a keyword?

I posted it as that is the definition of eating the flesh of another of the same species

In zoology, cannibalism is the act of one individual of a species consuming all or part of another individual of the same species as food.(Cannibalism (zoology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

The interesting thing is that tribes that do this believe that they take on some of the charastics of the one they eat..

[Slambat]

John 5

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVPvCctULYk

[ADSUM]

The rambling of someone who does not have faith in the words of Jesus...

One either has faith in the gift of the Eucharist that Jesus gave us at the Last Supper and told us to do this in His memory or ....

one does not have faith in the words of Jesus.

Many reject the the graces from God when they do not receive and believe in the Eucharist - The Body and Blood of Jesus.

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” (John 6:53–56).

[CynicalBear]

>>During Holy Mass, after the two-fold consecration, the host was changed into live Flesh and the wine was changed into live Blood, which coagulated into five globules, irregular and differing in shape and size.<<

2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

[don-o]

So you throw in with the oldest haters of the Church. In the interest of consistency and completeness, we can expect charges of orgies and necromancy as did the original haters?