Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: InterestedQuestioner
Thank you for the wonderful quotes from Scripture. They all point to metaphors that Christ employed to explain Himself. They all take the format of metaphor followed by explanation of the metaphor, just as Jesus did with the parables. The Eucharistic references, however, do not take this format, it is clear to me that the literal and correct reading of the passages is that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. In response to your questions:

Of course John 6 is a metaphor please read the 6th chapter of John from verse 1 until the end with me .

Jesus preformed a miracle where thousands were fed bread. He then went away from the crowd.

The crowd followed him, but not because they sought Christ as teacher or Savior, not because they knew he was the Christ, but because they wanted to get their stomachs full of bread.

Read the rebuke of Christ to them

Jhn 6:25 And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?
Jhn 6:26 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.

It was then He began to teach that they were looking for a miracle that would fill their stomachs ( as did the nation of Israel in the desert) and not for His presence or teaching. They only wanted their temporal needs met.

Jhn 6:27 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.
Jhn 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

Jhn 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

Jesus laid out that salvation was by FAITH, and that Faith was a work of the Father

Then then decided to put Christ to a test ...Give us PROOF. It was THEY that brought up the manna (bread) Not Christ

Jhn 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?
Jhn 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.

Jesus clarified where salvation comes from;

Jhn 6:32 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

He was pointing out that the "bread from heaven " that kept their fathers only gave them physical life.. HE on the other hands was sent from the Father to give them eternal spiritual life.

They did not "get it" they were looking for REAL bread to give them physical life as had happened in the desert, they were looking for tangible bread like manna, justy as they were looking for an earthly savior not a divine salvation.

Jhn 6:34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.

Jesus then patiently explained to them that His flesh is life for the world.. His crucified body was what was going to bring eternal life, not a temporal one

Jhn 6:35 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.
Jhn 6:36 But I said unto you,That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
Jhn 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
Jhn 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
Jhn 6:39 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.

Jhn 6:40 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 entire message is on salvation by faith .

The listeners did not get it , they were hung up on another point .

Jhn 6:41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven.
Jhn 6:42 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?

Notice the focus of the crowd was not on Him being the BREAD or eating Him but that He said he came down from heaven ( a claim of divinity )

Jhn 6:43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.
Jhn 6:44 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.

Jhn 6:45 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.
Jhn 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

Jhn 6:48 I am that bread of life.
Jhn 6:49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
Jhn 6:50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
Jhn 6:51 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.

Jesus here declares that the manna was a TYPE of Christ.. The manna gave physical life, His flesh is for the eternal life of men

Jhn 6:52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?
Jhn 6:53 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.
Jhn 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
Jhn 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. Jhn 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
Jhn 6:57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
Jhn 6:58 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.

Keep in mind He had already taught at some length that He that believed on Him would be saved. He has already taught that the man that is taught by the Father comes to him and are saved. So to interpret this as other than a metaphor of being saved by His soon to be broken body and his shed blood, by internalizing the fact of the atonement in faith is not a good reading and it is not the understood by the new church

This is from jamison

"Here, for the first time in this high discourse, our Lord explicitly introduces His sacrificial death--for only rationalists can doubt this not only as that which constitutes Him the Bread of life to men, but as THAT very element IN HIM WHICH POSSESSES THE LIFE-GIVING VIRTUE.--"From this time we hear no more (in this discourse) of "Bread"; this figure is dropped, and the reality takes its place" [STIER].

Jhn 6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard [this], said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
Jhn 6:61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?

If they were offended at that, he was saying wait until you hear the rest

Jhn 6:62 [What] and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
Jhn 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.
Jhn 6:64 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.
Jhn 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Jhn 6:66 From that [time] many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

They did not like hearing that salvation had to be given them and much like the manna in the desert, it was totally a gift of the Father. They could not do anything on their own to earn it, they only had access to it by faith ( remember the Jews could only gather enough manna for the one days meals, and for 2 days on the day before the sabbath, they had to have faith in God to provide what was necessary for their life) . The idea that salvation was all of God and not found in law keeping was blasphemy to the law oriented Jews that felt their salvation was based on their will, their law keeping etc

To make an attempt to make this a teaching on the Lords supper misses the mark. Christ was still alive and in His flesh and he was, by your reckoning , telling them to do something they could not do because the Lords Supper had not been instituted yet,it is a spiritual eating and drinking that is here spoken of, not a sacramental.

This was clearly a metaphorical teaching to Jews looking for a Physical savior like Moses, and for physical bread to meet their physical hunger. Jesus always used symbols that the Jews understood to make spiritual points.

146 posted on 02/11/2006 7:59:02 AM PST by RnMomof7 ("Sola Scriptura,Sola Christus,Sola Gratia,Sola Fide,Soli Deo Gloria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies ]


To: RnMomof7; jjm2111
"Of course John 6 is a metaphor please read the 6th chapter of John from verse 1 until the end with me."

I've never even mentioned John 6. I've been discussing Matthew 26: 26-28.
"Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is my body."; And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

This same teaching is presented four times in the Scriptures. The Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Scripture clearly tells us so. There is no support in Scripture for the assertion that Christ is not physically present in the Eucharist. It is a doctrine asserted against the clear meaning of Scripture by those who do not have faith in Scripture.

"The fact is there was no doctrine of transubstantiation until the 1200's and the reading of the early church Fathers does not indicate they had a belief in it.'

Completely incorrect, RnMomof7. The term transubstantiation was coined in the 1200's to understand the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, but the doctrine of the Real Presence is the clear witness of Scripture and the Universal witness of the Church fathers.
"Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead." St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans", 110 A.D.


This statement was written by St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, on his way to be martyred in Rome. St. Ignatius was a disciple of the Apostle John. The Protestant contention is that the Catholic Church fell away from Christ at some point (which they never specify,) and taught false doctrine. Ignatius KNEW the Apostle John, he is writing perhaps within less than 20 years of the writing of the Book of Revelation. Do you really want to argue that the Church had apostasized by this point??

"Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ." St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians", 110 A.D.

""This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God's Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus."; St. Justin Martyr, First Apology", Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155.
As I'm sure you are aware, we can cite dozens of quotes from Church authorities from the early Church that show that the Early Christians clearly understood the Scriptures to mean exactly what they say. I'll just give you one more from St. Augustine.
"You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ." ("Sermons", [227, 21])
RnMomof7, Scripture clearly says that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. The Historical tradition is unambiguous, the Church has always understood the Eucharist to be the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.

"I find it interesting that you used a scripture text to prove tradition is correct :)"

No, I am using tradition to demonstrate that Scripture is correct. Scripture and Apostolic Tradition are completely consistent.

"Transubstantiation was never at any time accepted by any part of the Church Universal ,whether Early-Patristic, Post-Nicene, Greek, Roman, or Proto-Protestant (alias Culdee or Waldensian etc.) until specifically the Roman Church proclaimed it dogmatically as an article of her own changing faith, at the 4th Lateran Council in 1215."

This is a load of baloney, where did you get this cut and paste? , I've just proved the author of that statement to be incorrect. I'm sure you've had dozens of other quotes from the Fathers quoted to you previously, and it should be quite evident what the Early Church believed regarding the Eucharist.


The Point of justification by Grace through Faith is that we must believe God. Scripture says that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.

The Catholic Doctrine on the Eucharist is that it is truly the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. None of your quotes demonstrate otherwise.

""Of course John 6 is a metaphor please read the 6th chapter of John from verse 1 until the end with me."


Johh 6 emphatically underscores the other four instances in Scripture where Jesus identifies the Eucharist as his Body and Blood. You cited John 6 after I had cited Matthew 26, indicating that you are quite aware of the significance of John 6.

While it's quite likely true that the Lord's supper is merely a memorial in those communities which are based upon the teachings of men from the 16th century, the Eucharist within the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Faith is truly the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, just as Scripture and tradition tell us.
157 posted on 02/11/2006 10:56:00 AM PST by InterestedQuestioner (Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies ]

To: RnMomof7
Thank you, RnMom, for the wonderful Scripture lesson on John 6.

"I will cry unto God most high; unto God that performeth all things for me." -- Psalm 57:2

161 posted on 02/11/2006 11:41:26 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson