Posted on 05/30/2005 12:57:09 PM PDT by NYer
I agree. I did not say that Peter stopped following Christ. My point was that Jesus responded very dramatically to Satan's attempt to hijack a true believer. Peter's flesh didn't want his Master, Jesus to suffer and die on the cross. However, unlike Judas, he was still willing to accept and believe in a Messiah who was humiliated and died on the cross. This was evident by his personal disgust for himself when he realized his threefold denial.
I imagine the look Christ gave Peter during the trial when their eyes met was one of love, and Peter's return gaze was a pained "why must it be this way Master"? After the resurrection Peter understood clearly the implications of the cross, and was a powerful Evangelist for Jesus Christ.
Thanks for your response.
**I understand the importance of Baptism. However, we have the example of the family of Cornelius reciving the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues before baptism.**
There is no doubt in my mind that God had to fill the family of Cornelius with the Holy Ghost, before water baptism, since he knew Peter needed absolute proof that the Gentiles were indeed included in the salvation plan.
Peter explained that situation (Acts 11) when questioned by the elders in Jerusalem. Peter and some of the brethern were still struggling with what was required of the Gentiles in Acts 15, and Gal. 2:8-14, where Paul mentions confronting Peter.
**We also have the good thief, who was given salvation without baptism.**
The thief was still under the law of Moses.
Jesus, the testator, wasn't dead yet, "For where a testament is, there must also be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth". Heb. 9:16,17
The Lord told the leper in Matt. 8:4 "See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testamony unto them."
The law ended with the death of the Christ. This "new and living way" (Heb. 10:20) began after his death and resurrection, with the outpouring of the Holy Ghost.
**After the resurrection Peter understood clearly the implications of the cross, and was a powerful Evangelist for Jesus Christ.**
Peter had no power to overcome until he received the Holy Ghost in Acts 2. In fact, The Lord told him "..when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethern". Luke 22:32.
And even after walking and talking with the Lord for about three years, and after the resurrection, He still had to open "their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures". Luke 24:45
And before the Lord was received out of their sight, He told them that "ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me.." Acts 1:8
Jesus Christ with them was as good as the Holy Spirit being with them. However the Holy Spirit can be with believers all over the world simultaneously, whereas the incarnate Christ can only be in one location at a time. After the resurrection, the Holy Spirit could enter into cleansed by the blood believers. A perfect man, Jesus Christ, had to return to heaven for the fulfillment of the required ransom.
Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.
Mar 3:14 And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach,
Jhn 17:8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received [them], and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.
Mat 10:19-20
19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
Jhn 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
Jhn 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
I do accept the authority expressed in Matt 16:18. Have you studied PISTEO?
Good point. It is not for me to interfere with the faith of my fellow man as he directs it in relationship with God. There may be some aspects of faith from the RCC interpretation of the Eucharist which are in keeping with His will.
I also can understand how a legalist might follow the interpretation of transubstantiation without returning or walking in fellwship with God. For this reason, I do not find that interpretation to express the robust meaning of our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus as he broke bread, representing his body being broken for us, and the fruit of the vine being supped, representing the blood of the New Covenant. These two aspects present far more significance to myself in the spirit, than would any identification of the molecular structure of the wine becoming red corpuscles and the bread becoming protein.
BTW, my response was not to render a salute to other authority, ...it was a response to what I unserstood to be an honest question. I havn't read if there is another hymn or psalm being referenced in the Last Supper passages.
pisteo?
“Thanks for your civil discussion of this topic”
I want to continue this discussion in a Christian manner. But as you point out, even Christ got angry at times!
Jesus wanted us to be one. “I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul? 1 Cor 1:10-13 We cannot be one if everyone brings his own version of the Truth.
I do not have a lot of time this weekend, as my daughter is playing in a AAU state championship. But I do want to leave you with a challenge.
"The Bible should be taken literally, except when it clearly designates otherwise. A straightforward, unbiased reading of the text in the entire Bible should be undertaken by all individuals." I take the approach that it is literally true in all regards. Especially if it is supported by other Scripture. Or, if someone proposes something completely absurd (As you point out, “We are not to eat the pages of the Bible however”) and is found nowhere in the Bible, I ignore it.
I would challenge you to make a straightforward, unbiased reading of the text the bread of Life discourse again, for the first time. See if the literal interpretation of “This is My Body” in contradicted anywhere in Scripture. See if a symbolic view is consistent with other Scripture.
Only a literal interpretation makes sense in light of “Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. … For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. (1 Cor. 11:27, 29).
Damnation from a symbol? No, damnation from not discerning the Lord’s body.
I would hold your position if the Bible told us that the bread became Jesus' flesh when it is blessed, and that the wine became Jesus' blood when it is blessed. Similarly to the Bible not instructing us to eat the pages of the Bible despite it saying that we live by the Words of God.
In this passage the first statement "He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.", sets up His subsequent language that helps us understand what it is to believe. To believe one must inculcate the truth of the cross into a persons life. The bread Christ gives is the death of His flesh on the cross. Failing to accept this fact brings damnation.
Jhn 6:47-51
47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
48 I am that bread of life..
49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
51 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.
Consider:
1. I do not believe Jesus death on the cross was for my salvation. vs.
I do not believe that I must eat Jesus' flesh for my salvation.
2. I do not believe the blood shed by Jesus Christ on the cross can cleanse me from my sins. vs.
I do not believe I must drink Jesus Christ blood to be cleansed of my sin.
Which does He mean in the John 6 passage?
When we share the Gospel message do we tell people that if they believe they are eating Jesus' literal flesh and drinking Jesus' literal blood, they are saved; or do we say if they believe Jesus died on the cross for their sins they will be saved?
There might be some significance in those who are simply exercising faith alone in Christ alone by thinking and believing and behaving in the fashion where they understand the Church and the Word of God to actually communicate transubstantiation and following that through faith in Him alone.
Even if other men who might not understand that, nor observe physical changes of the bread on blood, nevertheless, the RC devout Christian, might indeed be following the intent Reformed Christians understand the Eucharist to represent, by their obedience in faith alone.
Would you agree?
Your arguments do not follow a straight line, and lead you to a non-scriptural conclusion.
Let’s break down your argument into the components:
1. "He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." - This is truth in scripture
2. “sets up His subsequent language that helps us understand what it is to believe” – This is a logical assumption that Christ tells us what He wants us to do.
3. “To believe one must inculcate the truth of the cross into a persons life” Yes, the truth of the cross and all the other Truths expressed in scripture
4. “The bread Christ gives is the death of His flesh on the cross.” You are just making this up! Where is this in scripture? Scripture says the bread is His flesh. The bread is not His death. You are just making this up.
5. “Failing to accept this fact brings damnation” This only follows from what you made up in #4. This is not biblical. This is a tradition of man. What brings damnation is not what you said, but “not discerning the Lord's body” in the bread. This is the only interpretation that is biblical. You do not need to add anything to see the literal meaning.
When reading scripture, try to accept the words of scripture as literal. Try not to add non-biblical traditions of man. Only a literal interpretation makes sense in light of 1 Cor. 11:27-29. Damnation cannot come from a symbol.
On to your second point:
1. I do not believe Jesus death on the cross was for my salvation. vs.
I do not believe that I must eat Jesus' flesh for my salvation.
It is not an either/or thing. It is both/and.
The death of Christ was for our salvation. This is true. Also true is "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).
From your earlier and correct assumption --“sets up His subsequent language that helps us understand what it is to believe” -- this is exactly what He is doing. We are saved by the cross, AND we must eat his flesh to have eternal life. We can’t pick and choose. We must do both. Because Jesus said so. Literally so.
“Which does He mean in the John 6 passage?”
He literally means what he said. Not either/or, but BOTH. Your either/or is nor arguing from the entire scripture.
"The thief was still under the law of Moses"
Do we know the thief was a Jew?
"I would not consider your position to be "impossible""
I would suggest that "my" position is the literal reading of the scripture. Your position keeps introducing extra-biblical ideas.
You yourself state that "The Bible should be taken literally, except when it clearly designates otherwise. A straightforward, unbiased reading of the text in the entire Bible should be undertaken by all individuals." Why are you deviating from the literal here? I would suggest that you do so because it is not in agreement with the traditions you believe.
And I ask youu again -- Where is literal interpretation of “This is My Body” contradicted anywhere in Scripture?
The Gospel is the overriding truth contained in the Bible. The entire Old Testament is a lead-in to the cross. All of the sacrifices, all of the typology, the seed of the woman prophecy in Genesis, most of the other prophecies in the Old Testament, the relationships of Adam, Enoch, Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Joseph, Moses, the Davidic kingship all point to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
4. “The bread Christ gives is the death of His flesh on the cross.” You are just making this up! Where is this in scripture? Scripture says the bread is His flesh. The bread is not His death. You are just making this up.
Question: What is the requirement for a man to enter heaven?
Answer: Believe that Jesus Christ died for their sins on the cross and that He resurrected from the dead in fulfillment of the scriptures.
Question: Is there any other requirement according to scripture?
Answer: No!
Question: Does a person need to receive communion to enter Heaven?
Answer: No, for the Old Testament saints and the thief on the cross never received communion.
Question: Can someone who has never received communion be considered to have partaken of the bread of life?
Answer: Yes, all those who enter heaven believe on Jesus Christ, whether looking forward to the Messiah by faith, as the Old Testament saints, or looking back to the cross as do New Testament saints.
Question: Is Jesus Christ talking about transubstantiation in John 6?
Answer: The entirety of scripture screams that He is not.
Having been annoited by the Holy Spirit, we have received the blessing which is bestowed on those that have partaken of the bread of life. Jesus Christ now abides in us via the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. We have been redeemed by the flesh being broken on the cross and our sins are washed by the shed blood of our redeemer. The bread and the wine, the flesh and the blood, the broken body and the pierced hands, He was bruised for our iniquities, with His stripes we are healed.
1Jo 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
Isa 53:5 But he [was] wounded for our transgressions, [he was] bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace [was] upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
This is the Gospel message. Once a person believes the Gospel the Holy Spirit takes up residence in their heart and begins the sanctification process. For those who believe the Gospel they receive immediate atonement and are justified before God.
When reading scripture, try to accept the words of scripture as literal. Try not to add non-biblical traditions of man. Only a literal interpretation makes sense in light of 1 Cor. 11:27-29. Damnation cannot come from a symbol.
Damnation comes in only one way, rejection of the testimony of the Holy Spirit, which is the Gospel.
Mar 3:28-29
28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men,, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
Jhn 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
Jhn 14:26 But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost,
**Do we know the thief was a Jew?**
Since that's a question, I'll try to answer.
I'm not sure. Here's some points to ponder:
1. Since the 'gospels' took place in Israel, and the Lord's pre-crucifiction focus was preaching to the "lost sheep of Israel", any non-Jews (which would include the the mixed-blood Samaritans, John 4:9)were usually mentioned by their Gentile nationality (Cannaan, Mat.15:22; Syrophenician, Mark 7:26; and Roman occupiers).
2. The thief, in spite of being a lawbreaker, was God-fearing, and rebuked the other thief for his nasty remarks to the Lord.
3. The thief was not ignorant of prophecy, having realized at some point that Jesus was the Messiah. For he asked Jesus to "remember me when thou comest into THY kingdom".
Hopefully, those thoughts seem sensible.
And I ask youu again -- Where is literal interpretation of “This is My Body” contradicted anywhere in Scripture?
As I have said previously, Jesus Christ was using His literal uninjured body to present the broken bread as His body and the wine as His blood, which makes it a "clear designation otherwise". When we look at other passages of scripture we can know that Jesus was not speaking of His flesh and blood literally because He clearly designated otherwise by His presentation of the elements as a remembrance of His yet future death. It is what the elements represent that we must believed on, namely the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
**Question: What is the requirement for a man to enter heaven?**
**Answer: Believe that Jesus Christ died for their sins on the cross and that He resurrected from the dead in fulfillment of the scriptures.**
bondserv, your answer is basically from Romans 10. Romans was written to born again people, "called to be saints"(Rom. 1:7) "sanctified by the Holy Ghost"(15:16). Paul, to the Thessalonians (2 Th. 2:13), said they were chosen "to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth".
The keeper of the prison in Acts 16 was told how to believe (the rest of the story, as Paul Harvey would say), for 'he and all his' were baptized, 'straightway'. He 'rejoiced, believing in God with all his house'.
'Believe' is a verb, meaning action. Jesus (John 3:3-8), and Peter (Acts 2:38,39) told us how to be 'born of the water and of the Spirit'. Both passages say 'EVERY ONE'. It's the required faith of this dispensation, the 'new and living way'.
An action on our part is to receive or reject.
Jhn 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:
Christ used Moses lifting the brass serpent (judged sin) on a pole.
God provided the conditions for healing and the instruction about how to go about receiving healing as well as the supernatural healing that, if the conditions were met, happened. The Israelis could either look to the brass serpent for healing or refuse to look to the brass serpent for healing. In one event God got all the glory for a miraculous healing, in the other event a person condemned themselves to death by their refusal.
bondserv, your answer is basically from Romans 10. Romans was written to born again people, "called to be saints"(Rom. 1:7) "sanctified by the Holy Ghost"(15:16). Paul, to the Thessalonians (2 Th. 2:13), said they were chosen "to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth".
This is instruction by Paul to believers in Rome how and to whom they should preach the Gospel.
Rom 10:9-15
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
Whether or not belief in "transubstantiation" is a hindrance to our relationship with God is the important question.
Cannibalism would be considered breaking the Mosaic Law. Wholeheartedly believing in a suffering servant who was humiliatingly put to death, better fits the text and is clarified in two ways. Jesus says that they are spiritual words in John six and He uses His uninjured body to present the elements that He calls His body and blood. Can we swallow a Messiah who was subjected to the kind of treatment Jesus Christ was, and still have faith in Him as being the Almighty God.
Supernaturally becoming one with God through our cleansing by Christ's shed blood makes us a holy vessel for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Being thus one with God in the spiritual sense, means we have partaken of the bread of life. Our name is in the Book of Life. By believing on Jesus Christ for salvation.
In God's economy, shed blood is a requirement for atonement of sin.
Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.
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.