Posted on 09/17/2013 8:25:21 PM PDT by jodyel
"Unless You Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and Drink His Blood You Have No Life In You"
Are these words of Jesus from John 6:53 to be taken literally or figuratively? The Roman Catholic Church teaches the context of John chapter six and the above headlined verse 53 are literal. Thus Jesus is giving absolute and unconditional requirements for eternal life. In fact, this literal interpretation forms the foundation for Rome's doctrine of transubstantiation -- the miraculous changing of bread and wine into the living Christ, His body and blood, soul and divinity. Each Catholic priest is said to have the power to call Jesus down from the right hand of the Father when he elevates the wafer and whispers the words "Hoc corpus meus est." Catholics believe as they consume the lifeless wafer they are actually eating and drinking the living body and blood of Jesus Christ. This is a vital and important step in their salvation and a doctrine they must believe and accept to become a Catholic.
If priests indeed have the exclusive power to change finite bread and wine into the body and blood of the infinite Christ, and if indeed consuming His body and blood is necessary for salvation, then the whole world must become Catholic to escape the wrath of God. On the other hand, if Jesus was speaking in figurative language then this teaching becomes the most blasphemous and deceptive hoax any religion could impose on its people. There is no middle ground. Therefore the question of utmost importance is -- Was the message Jesus conveyed to the Jewish multitude to be understood as literal or figurative? Rome has never presented a good argument for defending its literal interpretation. Yet there are at least seven convincing reasons why this passage must be taken figuratively.
Counterfeit Miracle
There is no Biblical precedent where something supernatural occurred where the outward evidence indicated no miracle had taken place. (The wafer and wine look, taste and feel the same before and after the supposed miracle of transubstantion). When Jesus changed water into wine, all the elements of water changed into the actual elements of wine.
Drinking Blood Forbidden
The Law of Moses strictly forbade Jews from drinking blood (Leviticus 17:10-14) A literal interpretation would have Jesus teaching the Jews to disobey the Mosaic Law. This would have been enough cause to persecute Jesus. (See John 5:16)
Biblical Disharmony
When John 6:53 is interpreted literally it is in disharmony with the rest of the Bible. "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you," gives no hope of eternal life to any Christian who has not consumed the literal body and blood of Christ. It opposes hundreds of Scriptures that declare justification and salvation are by faith alone in Christ.
Produces Dilemma
It appears that the "eating and drinking" in verse 6:54 and the "believing" in verse 6:40 produce the same result - eternal life. If both are literal we have a dilemma. What if a person "believes" but does not "eat or drink"? Or what if a person "eats and drinks" but does not "believe?" This could happen any time a non-believer walked into a Catholic Church and received the Eucharist. Does this person have eternal life because he met one of the requirements but not the other? The only possible way to harmonize these two verses is to accept one verse as figurative and one as literal.
Figurative In Old Testament
The Jews were familiar with "eating and drinking" being used figuratively in the Old Testament to describe the appropriation of divine blessings to one's innermost being. It was God's way of providing spiritual nourishment for the soul. (See Jeremiah 15:16; Isaiah 55:1-3; and Ezekiel 2:8, 3:1)
Jesus Confirmed
Jesus informed His disciples there were times when He spoke figuratively (John 16:25) and often used that type of language to describe Himself. The Gospel of John records seven figurative declarations Jesus made of Himself -- "the bread of life" (6:48), "the light of the world" (8:12), "the door" (10:9), "the good shepherd" (10:11), "the resurrection and the life" (11:25), "the way, the truth and the life" (14:6), and "the true vine" (15:1). He also referred to His body as the temple (2:19).
Words Were Spiritual
Jesus ended this teaching by revealing "the words I have spoken to you are spirit" (6:63). As with each of the seven miracles in John's Gospel, Jesus uses the miracle to convey a spiritual truth. Here Jesus has just multiplied the loaves and fish and uses a human analogy to teach the necessity of spiritual nourishment. This is consistent with His teaching on how we are to worship God. "God is Spirit and His worshippers must worship in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24). As we worship Christ He is present spiritually, not physically. In fact, Jesus can only be bodily present at one place at one time. His omnipresence refers only to His spirit. It is impossible for Christ to be bodily present in thousands of Catholic Churches around the world.
When Jesus is received spiritually, one time in the heart, there is no need to receive him physically,
Sorry, had to follow scripture and repent of that because it tells me to rebuke the pagan practices and teachings of the RCC. You do believe that when scripture says we did something wrong that we should repent right?
Jesus was known as the son of Joseph. Joseph was the son of Heli.
In Matthew Joseph's father is
16Jacob was the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary. Mary was the mother of Jesus, who is called the Messiah.
Luke gives Mary's bloodline and Matthew gives Joseph's and states such. Both go back to David. Jesus is from David through Mary not Joseph. He is legally Jewish through Mary.
Thank you for documenting that the Bible doesn’t say affirmatively that it is the ONLY source. The question was for the prots to prove that it does. Have you decided to become Catholic?
Clarification which may make this easier to understand. When a man married into a family the father of the bride called him son. The grooms father called the bride daughter.
As a born again Holy Spirit filled follower of Christ I would never ever align with the beliefs of a pagan infested cult such as the RCC.
John 6:53 is unscriptual?
“Jesus divided the bread, poured the wine and partook of both before it was presented to the disciples. I do not doubt that Christ performed this transubstantiation.”
Check your chronology. It is not your friend:
1) He gives thanks, breaks the bread, declares it is His body: “And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.(1Co 11:24)
2) After “he had supped,” He offers the cup, which He calls His blood: “After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.” (1Co 11:25)
3) After calling it the blood of the covenant, with the cup still in hand, He calls it “this fruit of the vine” which He would not drink AGAIN until reunited with the Apostles in heaven, either indicating He was about to drink it, or had just drank it: “for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
(Mat 26:28-29)
you should have stayed awake during religion class and it would have been explained to you...
it is really amazing that a person belonging to a man made denomination would point out the fallicy of a man made catechism.
to say that the Catholic church does anything unbiblical is to show ignorance of the history of the bible itself. Where do you think it came from, who do you think brought it through the first 1,600 years of Christianity, who do you think copied it, by hand, so that it could be preserved for all of mankind, why would the Catholic Church have done that and then taught something unbiblical??????????
basically no one had a copy of the bible until the printing press was invented, few if any people could have affordrd to own a copy of it and just as few could have read it.
the bible, as we know it is a book containing holy scripture but the handfull of people who could have taken advantage of it, as a book, before modern times, were the learned, scholars, librarians, monastaries etc..
but then along came the revolutionaries....knowing nothing of what they spoke (except their leaders), and drew millions of people away from the true church.
the people were totally uneducated, they couldn't read because there was nothing to read nor learn from. The protestant leaders gave these uneducated peopple a much easier was to salvation than did the 1,600 year old Christian church. Don't worry about your bad behavior, Christ already died for your sins and you won't be held accountable...want to get a divorce and remarry, sure, go ahead, no problem here. Is it hard for you to believe in transubstantiation, no problem, just eat this bread and drink this wine and we'll consider it a comemerative celebration, don't want to confess to a priest, no problem, Christ died for your sins so live it up and all is well.....pathetic
the roman Catholic Church brought you the bible from which you are quoting...say thank you!
didn't pay attention in fourth grade when they taught you to diagram a sentence, did you???
imperative sentence....take, eat, and do this
how many billions of Catholics do you suppose there were living over the last 2,013 years??????
good luck with ignoring 2,000 years of Christian teaching....make up your own rules as you go along, it is much easier AND you can play golf instead of going to Mass on Sunday....see, the benefits are neverending!!!
Depends on your definition of Catholic. The current crop have only existed since Vatican II. They change as often as their traditions do.
Catholicism IS biblical Christianity....think about it!!!
you have to be kidding....God can create the universe and He can"t be present in more than one place at a time.........think about what you said.
there are consequences for refuting Christ's church...I don't pretend to know what they are, but you cannot turn your back on Christ and expect Him to be happy.
Sure; if one considers it to be anything other than a metaphor.
Galatians 5:12
Looks like you work nights and Annalex works days...
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.