Posted on 01/03/2010 1:53:57 PM PST by NYer
“Take all of John 6 together, in context. Christ was not speaking metaphorically.”
Oh really?!
Let’s look at the whole passage at once. It isn’t that long...my comments will be in []:
22On the next day the crowd that remained on the other side of the sea saw that there had been only one boat there, and that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, but that his disciples had gone away alone.
[In verses 1-15, John gives an account of the feeding of the 5000. In verses 16-21, Jesus comes to the disciples walking on water as they sail across.]
23Other boats from Tiberias came near the place where they had eaten the bread after the Lord had given thanks. 24 So when the crowd saw that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they themselves got into the boats and went to Capernaum, seeking Jesus.
25When they found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him, “Rabbi, when did you come here?” 26Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. 27 Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you.
[What is he talking about? For comparison, see this in John 4: 10Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” 11The woman said to him, “Sir, you have nothing to draw water with, and the well is deep. Where do you get that living water? 12 Are you greater than our father Jacob? He gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did his sons and his livestock.” 13Jesus said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again, 14but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.” This is called a METAPHOR, and is NOT literal teaching.]
For on him God the Father has set his seal.” 28Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” 29Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.”
[Jesus says we must believe - that is the work God requires of us!]
30So they said to him, “Then what sign do you do, that we may see and believe you? What work do you perform? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’” 32Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. 33For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” 34They said to him, “Sir, give us this bread always.”
[More metaphors]
35Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.
[Just as in verse 29, Jesus tells them they must believe. He who comes will not hunger. He who believes will not thirst. This is NOT literal language, since all of us experience physical hunger and thirst. This is speaking of SPIRITUAL matters!]
36But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.
[John Calvin, is that you?]
38For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.
[Eternal assurance? JESUS will lose nothing...]
40For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
[A recurring them of John: “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. John 3 We must BELIEVE!]
41So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?”
[Here we see their REAL reaction! Who is Jesus to rebuke THEM? Who does he think he is - God? How DARE he tell them how to live - they just came for some bread & a spectacle!]
43Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
[John Calvin, pick up the courtesy phone...]
45It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— 46 not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father. 47Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.
[There he goes again - it is BELIEF that is required for eternal life!]
48 I am the bread of life.
[Metaphor]
49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die.
[Metaphor. He contrasts the physical bread bringing physical life with the spiritual bread bringing spiritual life. If he was speaking physically, then the physical bread of the Eucharist - ‘really his flesh’ would bring physical life, and Peter would still be the Pope]
51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”
52The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
[Physical man interpreting spiritual truths physically...sound familiar?]
53So Jesus said to them, “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. 54Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.
[If Jesus was speaking physically, then the consecrated host could be given to anyone and they would have eternal life. But Catholics DON’T take that part literally, do you?]
55For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me.
[Is this literally speaking, or is he speaking of spiritual matters? Is it physical life he gives, or spiritual? If believing is required, then he isn’t speaking physically, is he?]
58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59Jesus said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.
60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?”
[What is the hard saying? Is it about ‘flesh’, or is it because Jesus is now claiming to be God? What does Jesus indicate the problem is...]
61But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?
[Golly - Jesus asks them if it will be hard to SEE him as God, ascending back to heaven. So we see, from Jesus himself, that the hard saying is that Jesus is God.]
63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64But there are some of you who do not believe.”
[More talk about this being a spiritual matter]
(For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) 65And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
66 After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him. 67So Jesus said to the Twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?” 68Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, 69and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”
[Once again, we see what the matter was. The REAL disciples “have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” Notice Peter does NOT say, “Well, if you tell us to eat your flesh...when do we begin?” The issue is if Jesus is God, not his teaching using a metaphor.]
70Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve?
[John Calvin, last chance to pick up the phone!]
And yet one of you is a devil.”
[You mean, even among the Twelve there was evil? You mean the original assembly (church) wasn’t pure? What does that imply for the church later?]
71He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the Twelve, was going to betray him.
So we come to the end. Those who followed for the spectacle were brought up sharply, as he rebukes them for lack of belief - in Him. He uses what they saw the previous day - bread - to teach about ‘the bread of life’ - that JESUS is the one they must come to and believe in. All the way thru, he uses metaphors to teach spiritual truths about spiritual life.
“Why even mention eating and drinking?”
Umm...because he had just fed the 5000?
“The common man couldn’t read back then, Mr. Rogers. Throwing that out is a straw argument. The fact is that the Catholic Church compiled and safeguarded the content of the Bible for the first several hundred years, correct?”
For the first few hundred years, congregations - the word ‘church’ means an assembly, not a hierarchy - accepted the Gospels, the writings of Paul and a few others as scripture. When some heretics began to DENY the authority of scripture, local church councils were held to CONFIRM what they believed - not to create new belief.
It is to the shame of the organization of the Catholic Church that it spent most of the next 1000 years trying to hide scripture. Erasmus and others give accounts of what passed for theological debates in 1300-1400...discussions like ‘If Jesus had been incarnate as a mule, would he have fit on a cross?’ Like some of the church fathers, teachers would take one verse and then twist it to mean whatever they wanted - and no one could check, since they had no scripture.
The Reformation arguably began with Wycliffe, who read the scriptures as a whole and couldn’t find Catholic teaching. He and his friends translated scripture into English, so the English could see for themselves - and the Catholic Archbishop pushed a law through penalizing anyone who possessed a copy of these unauthorized scripture with death, if they didn’t repent.
From Wycliffe through Tyndale, the Catholic Church fought to suppress scripture in the common tongue, since they believed it was dangerous for common men. Even King James agreed somewhat - the KJV used ‘church’ instead of the more accurate ‘congregation’ because his experience in Scotland led him to believe that those who could pick their church leaders could pick their political leaders as well. He threw out the Puritans from a meeting with the shout, “No Bishop, No King!”
And the Catholic opposition to publishing scripture lasted well beyond the invention of the printing press and folks who could read. A lot of men died before we common men were able to read scripture.
“Christ promised the Holy Spirit would guide the Church forever. Either you believe that or you don’t.”
Nope. He promised the Holy Spirit would guide US! WE are the church - wherever we gather in his name, his church is there. The Holy Spirit dwells in believers, and is present when believers gather. That has nothing to do with a Church Hierarchy, or the ‘Vicar of Christ’ - some of whom were very evil men.
The Holy Spirit lives in and guides believers, not organizations. What did Peter say? “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
The promise of the Holy Spirit “is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” He is promised to people, not an organization.
Jesus taught the visible church would have a mixture of believers and false men. Organizations fail, but the universal church - the body of Christ, believers - does not.
Hardly false. It was not written that way, nor was it meant that way. 2 Timothy 3 says nothing about salvation at all, for instance.
Don't kid yourself (or anyone else for that matter)...Those people knew the OT scriptures...
Joh 20:9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.
They knew not the scripture because it hadn't been written yet when this even took place...
Thank you for making my points for me. You are a most agreeable debator at times.
Like I said, you want to play a game and hunt for the word sufficient...The scriptures are MORE than sufficient...Far more than sufficient...They (the scriptures) will make a man perfect...
Sufficient for all good works. No mention of salvation.
The word 'glue' isn't in the scritpure...Yet the scriptures bind people together...
That's because there is far more than just glue that binds. The term sola isn't either. Actually, Scripture itself argues against it.
I prefer mine with four feet on the ground.
It mean perfect, or complete...Every translation out there says perfect or complete...Even your Catholic Jerome says perfect...
Not every one. The most accurate ones do not.
Fascinating.
I was unaware of the non Paulian authorship of Ephesians, Thessalonians, or Timothy. Much obliged.
“2 Timothy 3 says nothing about salvation at all, for instance.”
Hmmm...”...how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” 2 Tim 3:15
So we see that the scriptures “are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus”.
“It mean perfect, or complete...Every translation out there says perfect or complete... / Not every one. The most accurate ones do not.”
Umm...the word translated complete or adequate or perfect is “Artios”. Another site has: “The word “perfect” here is artios in the Greek. It is used only this once in the Bible. The Greek word artios means to be complete or fully-equipped. It is used to describe a ship that is ready for a voyage, the ship has everything on it that it could possibly need. It is also used in the Greek in reference to the ball and socket joint of the hip. It is perfect, artios. If anything is wrong with that joint or if there was something in it that joint it would be excruciatingly painful. The word perfect, artios, means to be fully equipped, perfect.”
There is a discussion of the meaning near the end of this page:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/trench/section.cfm?sectionID=22&lexicon=true&strongs=G739
Complete and perfect are sometimes the same thing - the idea being that if something is complete, then it has everything it needs and is ‘perfect’.
But if you prefer “complete”, that is OK. The NAB has it “competent, equipped for every good work.”
No matter how you slice it, a man who has been taught, rebuked etc from scripture is fully prepared and qualified for every good work - not some. That means his preparation was...sufficient!
Every good work. We agree on that. Wise for salvation does not mean sufficiency. We obviously disagree on the whole deal. In light of http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ which gives the approximate year or era of authorship of Christian writings, it appears that neither Timothy was written by Paul; also Hebrews, and Ephesians as well. At any rate, we believe that the meaning of this is that Scripture is profitable - which would make sense since Paul (or the author of Timothy) did not know of NT Scripture at the time of writing.
New Testament Books Written by Paul
30 A.D. - Jesus is Crucified, Dies and is Resurrected
50 A.D. - Book of 1Thessalonians
51 A.D. - Book of 2Thessalonians
53 A.D. (Spring) - Book of Galatians
56 A.D. (Late Winter) - Book of 1Corinthians
57 A.D. (Late Summer) - Book of 2Corinthians
57 A.D. (Winter) - Book of Romans
61 to 63 A.D. -
Books of Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, Hebrews
63 A.D. -
Books of Acts (written by Luke mostly about Paul), 1Timothy, Titus
67 A.D. - Book of 2Timothy
You post dates attributed to books. What is the basis for your claim? How do you know that Galations was written in 53 (for instance)?
Also, if you would, could you also post the dates of the various Gospels as your source claims please?
If the use of scripture makes one wise for salvation thu faith in Jesus, and fully equips one for every good work, then it is sufficient - contains what is needed - for salvation and holy living.
The point is not that we skip church, but that the doctrines found in scripture, and the teachings there, are adequate / good enough / sufficient for salvation and good living. Doctrine not found there is not required, but could still be true...provided it does not conflict with scripture.
Now, take the doctrine that at Mass, Priests offer a re-presentation of the actual flesh & blood of Jesus in a perpetual sacrifice, always going on before God.
Then read, “11And every [Jewish] priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” - Hebrews 10
That is a direct contradiction. Therefor, the doctrine that Jesus is being offered perpetually in the Mass is wrong - because doctrine cannot contradict the Breath of God.
“You post dates attributed to books. What is the basis for your claim?”
Exact dates are not known for certain. However, if you will find a good Protestant commentary, the introduction always covers who wrote it (pro & con), who it was written to (pro & con), date (pro & con), and why it was written (author’s opinion).
For example, the Bible Knowledge Commentary (http://www.christianbook.com/bible-knowledge-commentary-new-testament-volumes/9780896938007/pd/693800X?item_code=WW&netp_id=183661&event=ESRCN&view=detailshttp://www.christianbook.com/bible-knowledge-commentary-new-testament-volumes/9780896938007/pd/693800X?item_code=WW&netp_id=183661&event=ESRCN&view=details) has 3 pages discussing who wrote Timothy when. The authors concluded it was Paul, probably around 62-67 AD.
It isn’t an item of doctrine, so everyone is free to think about the arguments and decide for themselves.
But apparently, knowledge of an exact date & who wrote the Gospels is NOT a requirement for salvation or holy living...
It does not say that, nor was it intended to say that. The point is that 2 Timothy was written long after many Church doctrines were written. It may have been Paul; it may not have been. If it is was not Paul, then the doctrine of Sola Scriptura must come into examination simply based upon that. If Scripture itself is written wrongly - attributing authorship wrongly - then the whole of Scripture comes under scrutiny.
When the Church claims the ability to interpret Scripture correctly, then the urgency or importance of authorship lessens considerably.
When the Catholic priest re-presents the sacrifice at Calvary, that is not the same as Jewish literal sacrifices. They literally sacrificed animals. We Catholics re-present the sacrifice that Jesus did so that we all get it. Every Mass is a complete in your face statement of what Jesus did for us. That is why the Crucifix. This is what our Saviour did for us. The empty and barren cross is not that explicit. I'm not saying that all crosses need to be crucifixes, but they should be common.
Exact dates are not known for certain. However, if you will find a good Protestant commentary, the introduction always covers who wrote it (pro & con), who it was written to (pro & con), date (pro & con), and why it was written (author’s opinion).
That's why I was asking. There was no attribution and no proofs.
But apparently, knowledge of an exact date & who wrote the Gospels is NOT a requirement for salvation or holy living...
Not saying that it is. But if something about Scripture is wrong, then more things are possible; then the only way of understanding the word of God is through the Church and not through simply reading through and picking things up on your own.
“The point is that 2 Timothy was written long after many Church doctrines were written.”
Umm...which Church doctrines were written down outside of scripture by 70 or even 90 AD? And how do any of them contradict what was written to Timothy?
“If it is was not Paul, then the doctrine of Sola Scriptura must come into examination simply based upon that.”
Some argue (I do not) that it was common and accepted practice for a follower to write in their teacher’s name, so that a follower of Paul could have written Timothy. I disagree, but it would leave sola scriptura intact. For the record, I think that if it says Paul wrote it, he did. And no one disagreed until the 1800s, and those who disagreed did so specifically to attack the authority of scripture.
“We Catholics re-present the sacrifice that Jesus did so that we all get it. Every Mass is a complete in your face statement of what Jesus did for us.”
That sounds Baptist! “Do this in remembrance of me”, and as a proclamation of the sacrifice of Jesus for all time. It was my understanding, maybe wrong, that the Council of Trent said differently.
“But if something about Scripture is wrong, then more things are possible; then the only way of understanding the word of God is through the Church...”
I disagree. If scripture is wrong, then the Church itself has no value. If the word of God is wrong, then the words of men won’t comfort me.
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.