This one used to be one, but he has a new job now.
Yep just like I remembered, each of them has a face.
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,
Hail Mary, Mother of GOD...
Elijah!
You're BACK!!!
Romans 11:4
Your unique place in the world plan is noted.
Somehow the word ALLOWED has dropped off your statement...
When Jesus started to WRITE on the ground, the ACCUSERS slithered away.
Why?
Could they READ what Jesus was WRITING perhaps?
You mean the FIRST one to be called SATAN by Jesus?
The FIRST one who was CLEARLY in error?
(2:11-14) Galatians 2:11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
What a way to START a church!
This one used to be one, but he has a new job now.
Yep just like I remembered, each of them has a face.
Good luck.
That what BOTH sides are trying to do in these threads.
The problem is that this assembled gaggle of blind men have hold of a different part of the elephant.
Your mission, Mr. Phelps, is to try to convince others that YOUR vision is correct.
AS always, if any of your team are captured, we will disavow any of your actions.
"This thread will self-destruct in ten seconds. Good luck, jodyel."
I guess your seeing eye dog is not trained to detect CATHOLIC slurs directed towards PROTESTants.
That's ok; for we've found him to be rather toothless.
I'd like to hear their voices instead of slurs like STUPID and/or BLIND.
Ok; then WHO is the WHORE?
Amen.
DAVE sure did not get STONED as well - though APPLICATION of the LAW required it!
Not according to Salt Lake City!!
Oh?
Just WHO 'knows' the future?
I think that is wonderful!
another stunning example on why it is IMPOSSIBLE to have an even remotely intelligent discussion with a protestant.
Why blather about my having the Christian charity to characterize someone who slanders the Church Jesus Christ Himself founded as possibly being stupid and/or blind rather than just pointing out the fact that such people are aiding and abetting Satan?
Just go ahead and spew out the Mormon view for us.
Look to the Old Testament for the answer to that! That’s where the keys to understanding the symbolic language of Revelation is to be found! I’ll get you started:
How the faithful city has become a harlot, She who was full of justice! Righteousness once lodged in her, But now murderers. Isaiah 1:21
The faithful city was Jerusalem. The harlot of Revelation 17 is its corrupt, apostate priesthood, which opposed Christ and had Him crucified.
The clothes she is described as wearing are the clothes of an ancient Jewish priest. Read Exodus 28 to see how the priest’s clothes were to be made.
Revelation was completely fulfilled in 70 AD, with the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple.
“Revelation isn’t about the Pope and it isn’t about the future as we know it.
Oh?
Just WHO ‘knows’ the future?”
Christ did. He correctly predicted the destruction of Jerusalem almost 40 years (within a generation) before it happened.
Not according to Paul:
For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority; Colossians 2:9-10
By definition, a Christian is someone who has been made complete in Christ.
>> “But the truth is both Luther and Ribera were wrong. Revelation isn’t about the Pope and it isn’t about the future as we know it.” <<
.
You belong to a strange cult!
The Revelation is Yeshua’s 5th gospel.
It is literal in its general respects, using figurative language only to better set the scene for its prophecies.
It told the past, and it tells the immediate future in vivid detail to those that have the Holy Spirit.
The foolish term “futurism” in no way describes Darby’s beliefs. Darby was simply confused as to the extent to which Yehova would protect his elect. Take away the pre-trib rapture, and place it back where scripture has it, at the last trump of Yom Teruah, and Darby ceases to matter.
Luther doesn’t matter due to the anti-semitism that he acquired toward the end of his life; his earlier beliefs were closer to reality.
You need to get out of the cult and find Yeshua, the real one, not the Greek Jesus.
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.