Never Thirst-Taking Jesus" Literally" can be Fatal

Thoughts of Francis Turretine ^ | July 17, 2014 | TurretinFan

[RnMomof7]

Never Thirst - Taking Jesus "Literally" can be Fatal

Roman Catholics like to try to claim that they are just taking Jesus "literally" when they interpret "this is my body" to mean that what was in Jesus' hands was not bread but his physical body [FN1]. Three passages in John help to illustrate the problem with that approach: John 4, John 6, and John 7.  In the first, Jesus refers metaphorically to living water, in the second Jesus refers to himself as food and drink, and in the third Jesus offers drink to those who thirst.

In John 4, Jesus interacts with the Samaritan woman at Jacob's well.  He asks her for water, she objects because he's Jewish, and he responds that she should be asking him for water, because the water he offers is better than the water from Jacob's well. She misunderstands him as speaking physically, even after some further explanation.  She wants to stop the labor of drawing water and misunderstands Jesus' comments about "never thirst."

John 4:6-15
Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour. There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink. (For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.) Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans. Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water. The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water? Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle? Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.

In John 6, Jesus interacts with a number of "disciples" who want Jesus to repeat the miracle of the loaves that's reported at the beginning of the chapter.  Jesus explains that the person who believes on him will never thirst and whoever comes to him will never hunger, calling himself the "bread of life" that "came down from heaven." Jesus insists that the bread he offers is better than the manna that the people ate in the wilderness.  Jesus talks about them eating his flesh and drinking his blood, but they take him physically and go away in disgust.  Jesus explains that the words he speaks are spirit and life.  Jesus asks the twelve if they will go away too, but Peter (speaking for the group) says that they will stay with him because they believe and know that his words are the words of eternal life.

John 6:26-71
Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled. Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed. Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work? Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven? Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves. No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
I am that bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 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. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
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. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve. 

In John 7, Jesus interacts with those at the temple for the feast.  Jesus offers the thirsty people water.  John explains to us that Jesus is speaking about the Spirit as the "rivers of flowing water."

John 7:37-39 
In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

These passages illustrate Jesus' fondness for using food as a metaphor for trust in him.  We approach the Lord's table by faith, coming to Him as represented by the bread and cup.  We gain a benefit from this if we do so by faith, but not if we do so any other way.  It is not the physical elements that provide the benefit we receive, it is the Spirit.

Remember what Jesus said about clean/unclean foods:

Matthew 15:17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

Unfortunately, it seems our Roman Catholic friends and relatives fail to understand this.  Christ is our spiritual food and drink, not our physical nourishment.

Isaiah 44:3 For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring:
Psalm 105:41 He opened the rock, and the waters gushed out; they ran in the dry places like a river.
Isaiah 48:21 And they thirsted not when he led them through the deserts: he caused the waters to flow out of the rock for them: he clave the rock also, and the waters gushed out.
Psalm 78:20 Behold, he smote the rock, that the waters gushed out, and the streams overflowed; can he give bread also? can he provide flesh for his people?
1 Corinthians 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

The blessings we receive in Christ are primarily spiritual blessings.  We drink the spiritual drink from the spiritual Rock, and that Rock is Christ.  He is our Rock, we trust in Him.

To the glory of his grace!

TurretinFan

Footnote 1: I should add that the Roman Catholic position is particularly absurd in that it takes "this is my body" as implying that the bread ceases to be bread and becomes the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus.  Likewise, it is claimed that "this is ... my blood" implies exactly the same thing about the contents of the cup.  That's quite far from taking the words literally, in which the bread would just be the body, and the contents of the cup would just be the blood.

[Elsie]

Jesus and the apostles were eating a yearly meal.

The ‘church’ has morphed this into a ritual that happens every time the doors open.

[Elsie]

There will be no abortion of any kind for any reason and homosexual “marriage” will never be allowed in the Catholic Church.

[Elsie]

Protestantism is the only faith in the country that condones and sanctions sodomite “marriage”, in direct violation of the Word of God.

Surely there are some traditions that are getting stomped; too.

[WVKayaker]

That comment indicates a shallow understanding of Catholic Truth. The Deposit of Faith (including the Church's transmission of Our Lord's teachings pertaining to John 6) is infallible by virtue of the fact that the Originator of the Deposit is Jesus Christ Himself. Formal "magisterial renderings" pertaining to teachings understood "everywhere, always and by all" to have been revealed to us by Christ Himself would be superfluous to say the least.

Another fine example of saying nothing about nothing, trying to make nothing into something. We said it is true, so it must be...

[daniel1212]

FACT - Protestants gave this country abortion on demand. FACT - Protestants gave this country no-fault divorce which has led to the destruction of marriage as we know it. FACT - Protestants gave this country birth control pills, which has led to the most anti-God, most-promiscuous society in the history of the country. FACT - Protestantism is the only faith in the country that condones and sanctions sodomite “marriage”, in direct violation of the Word of God. I could on. Hopefully you get my point. Don’t get me started.

You argument, as usually, is false and basically meaningless in comparing two faiths, as not only is the overall fruit of Rome as liberal as Prots, and even more so, and support all the things you blame on Protestantism, and which liberalism Rome implicitly sanctions - and which fruit and actions is what Scripturally defines what en entity really believes - but "Protestantism faith" as defined by RCs actually includes the most conservative religious group in America as well as the most liberal.

Thus you must either compare each particular Prot church with Rome by what they overall do and effect where they predominate, or compare the two faiths based upon their most basic defining historical distinctives, based upon what they overall do and effect where they predominate.

In both cases Rome will not come out on top, and liberal Prots fail to historically Protestant, it remains that those who hold most strongly to the authority of Scripture as the wholly inspired accurate word of God, which most RCs do not - are the most conservative.

The Roman model basically requires the political carnal power to effectually manifest it believes in conservative values the way you assert, or cultic devotion, but both are unScriptural as the NT church did not begin or operate under the premise of ensured perpetual magisterial veracity.

So much for your contrived artificial comparison. I could on. Hopefully you get my point. Don’t get me started. It would not even impugn my faith and arguments for it which RC attack even if your statements were accurate, as what i believe opposes the very things you vainly try to blame the Reformation for.

[daniel1212]

Our Lord's teachings pertaining to John 6) is infallible by virtue of the fact that the Originator of the Deposit is Jesus Christ Himself. Formal "magisterial renderings" pertaining to teachings understood "everywhere, always and by all" to have been revealed to us by Christ Himself would be superfluous to say the least.

We said it is true, so it must be...

>

It seems that the RC argument is that an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium is essential for determination and assurance of Truth (including writings and men being of God) and to fulfill promises of Divine presence, providence of Truth, and preservation of faith, and authority. (Jn. 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:13; Mt. 16:18; Lk. 10:16)

And that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that such is that assuredly infallible magisterium. Thus any who knowingly dissent from the latter must be in rebellion to God.

Do you think this fairly represent what you hold to or in what way does it differ?

[BlatherNaut]

We said it is true, so it must be...

Wrong. Jesus Christ said it, so it IS true.

"He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth."

[NKP_Vet]

FACT - Protestants gave this country abortion on demand (A protestant DOMINATED US Supreme Court gave us Roe v. Wade)

FACT - Protestants gave this country no-fault divorce which has led to the destruction of marriage as we know it. (It all started in protestant California. The Catholic Church does not allow for divorces)

FACT - Protestants gave this country birth control pills, which has led to the most anti-God, most-promiscuous society in the history of the country. (Griswold v. Connecticut, 100% protestant US Supreme Court).

FACT - Protestantism is the only faith in the country that condones and sanctions sodomite “marriage”, in direct violation of the Word of God. (The Catholic Church will never allow homosexual “marriage”. Only protestants allow this abomination.

Prove me wrong Tonto. Prove me wrong!!

[daniel1212]

Prove me wrong Tonto. Prove me wrong!!

Already have shown you the vain fallacious nature of your attempted argument, but the blind lead the blind.

[daniel1212]

Wrong. Jesus Christ said it, so it IS true. "He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth."

Which simply is a question-begging assertion, as your conclusion does not follow your premise, as what Christ said was not and does not teach, promise or require what the church of Rome extrapolates out of this.

Beginning with her foundational novel premise of perpetual ensured magisterial infallibility, which is unScriptural, and unseen and unnecessary in the life of the church, as is, along with other things , her separate class of believers distinctively titled "priests," offering up "real" human flesh and blood as a sacrifice for sin, and literally consuming this to obtain spiritual life, around which act all else revolves, and looking to Peter as the first of a line of exalted infallible popes reigning over the church from Rome, and a separate class of believers distinctively titled "saints," and praying to created being in Heaven, and being formally justified by ones own sanctification/holiness, and thus enduring postmortem purifying torments in order to become good enough to enter Heaven, and saying rote prayers to obtain early release from it, and requiring clerical celibacy as the norm. Etc.

Now if you insist on continuing go back and answer the questions as regards your basis for determination and assurance of Truth.

[daniel1212]

Well you see, there is "in the church" as in what is official said on paper, then there is the reality of the "pews" and the RC priests, and populace.

• A combined 15 percent of the clergy polled identified themselves as "gay (9%) > or more (6%) on the homosexual side." Among younger priests 23 percent did so. Los Angeles Times (extensive) nationwide survey (2002). http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/reports/LAT-Priest-Survey.pdf

• 17 percent of the priests said "definitely" , and 27% said "probably," a homosexual subculture'--defined as a `definite group of persons that has its own friendships, social gatherings and vocabulary'--exists in their diocese or religious order. ^

• After examining the official web sites of 244 Catholic universities and colleges in America, the TFP Student Action found that 107 – or 43% have pro-homosexual clubs. TFP Student Action Dec. 6. 2011; studentaction.org/get-involved/online-petitions/pro-homosexual-clubs-at-107-catholic-colleges/print.html

[metmom]

How convenient to be able to pick and choose which words of Jesus to take literally, depending on how you want to support your doctrine.

That’s the ticket to establishing false teaching.

Make up a doctrine and then find verses to support it.

[metmom]

You’ll see all kinds of fabricated assertions by Catholics about what Protestants believe.

It’s really what they WISH non-Catholics would believe so as to discredit them, but since they cannot provide one shred of evidence to back up any of their absurd claims, they discredit only themselves.

[metmom]

It’s all part of the same discourse.

If you are going to take the eating literally, then the never thirsting and never hungering must be taken literally as well.

[trebb]

Sweet, predictable, dependable Elsie - will never miss an opportunity to turn any religion-oriented post to a slam against Mormonism. Glad to see you are still up and about and well.

[Elsie]

Jesus Christ said it, so it IS true.

 Jesus said it. I believe Him.

He also said...

Get thee behind me SATAN. 

"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?

"First let the children eat all they want," he told her, "for it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."

You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred?

When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, “Woman, here is your son,” 27 and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.

 

 

So now you have to decide how to take these statements.

 

[Elsie]

Prove me wrong Tonto. Prove me wrong!!

FACT!!!!

If you've gotten 'em; let's see 'em.

YOU are the one making the claim; YOU need to provide the evidence.

[Elsie]

Sweet, predictable, dependable Elsie - will never miss an opportunity to turn any religion-oriented post to a slam against Mormonism.

HMMMmmm...

Last time I looked, Mormonism was considered to be a religion.

AFAIK, Mormonism STILL believes and teaches this.

Got any comments on the CONTENT of the message; or will SLAMMING the messenger make you happy enough?

[Elsie]

Glad to see you are still up and about and well.

Me; too!

[CynicalBear]

Fact - if you want to blame the acts of some Protestants on all non Catholics then it's fair to blame the acts of some Catholics on all Catholics.

Do you really want to stay on that road? Need I mention the evil Popes or the paedophile priests? I could go on. Hopefully you get my point. Don't get us started.