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,
“...and who follows the church that He founded...”
The only “church” Jesus founded was the one founded upon the rock of profession of faith in Him. Those who believe are complete in Him, regardless of whether they are Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Baptist, Methodist, or Lutheran.
“And I suppose you believe that Israel was replaced by the church as well correct?”
Well, that’s what happens when you divorce one woman and marry another. The harlot is replaced by the bride. The bride is Christ’s church. Read Revelation 21 again. The “new heaven and earth” (spiritual Israel; the church) replaces the “old heaven and earth” (physical Israel; the Law) because the old heaven and earth is a metaphor for the land of Israel and it’s Temple. Again, these references can be understood by cracking open the Old Testament.
New covenant replaced the Old.
“Revelation was written around 96AD and in the first verse of the first chapter we read this.”
Revelation was written no later than 68 AD. Period.
“So its your contention that John was given a vision of things that must yet come to pass and that what he was shown was a prophecy were things that had already happened? Seriously?”
He was told to write of things that were, things that are, and things that will be. The things that “will be” were imminent to the people to whom and for whom he was writing these letters, as expressed repeatedly in the book with words like “soon” and “near.”
Try reading something other than Hal Lindsey.
“Both internal and external evidence show Revelation to have been written near the end of the first century around 96AD.”
Absolutely untrue, as some of the directives in the book would make no sense after the destruction of Jerusalem (”go measure the Temple.”)
“Preterists have been proven wrong over and over again.”
Keep telling yourself that.
>> Revelation was completely fulfilled in 70 AD, with the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple. <<
“The chief tenets of Satans cult of the blind!”
(He says as he hurls insults.) Missed irony 101, perhaps?
“The Revelation was written at least 22 years after the destruction of Jerusalem.”
Nope. It was written no later than 68 AD.
“And Yochanan was not a history teacher, he was a major prophet.”
He wrote of what was (history), what is (current events), and what will be (prophecy) to seven churches in Asia Minor (Turkey.) And he did so because those things that “would be” were about to happen, expressed through the use of words like “soon” and “near.”
Revelation was a letter of warning and encouragement to people living as its events unfolded right before their eyes almost 2,000 years ago. It has nothing to do with us!
“You belong to a strange cult!”
Two things:
You know nothing about me or what I belong to and;
This thread isn’t about me even if you did.
Discussion welcome. Personal attacks you can leave at the door.
“The Revelation is Yeshuas 5th gospel.”
Certainly an unorthodox view, but matters little one way or another to the discussion at hand.
“It is literal in its general respects, using figurative language only to better set the scene for its prophecies.”
I have no idea what this even means.
“You need to get out of the cult and find Yeshua, the real one, not the Greek Jesus.”
You really need to lay off the personal attacks. It says little about your ability to argue. It says even less about your “Christ-likeness.”
Excellent.
Sigh...
DUH!
No PRO-catholic site would mention it.
"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned;
and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given,
and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.
Brigham Young - JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)
I know...
Actually I am going by the adage that it is a good idea not to wrestle with a pig in the mud. The pig enjoys it to much, you both get dirty, and it is difficult to tell the two apart.
495
Statements of fact are not slurs.
Bring it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WJXHY2OXGE
All good verses; but the FACT remains that Jerusalem; itself; is NOT beside many waters.
Oh?
The new heaven and earth (spiritual Israel; the church) replaces the old heaven and earth (physical Israel; the Law) because the old heaven and earth is a metaphor for the land of Israel and its Temple.
THIS claim is senseless!
Chapter 21
21 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, Look! Gods dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.
Last time I looked...
We STILL have seas.
We STILL have the OLD Jerusalem, complete with fighting over the Temple Mount.
We STILL have tears and death and mourning and crying and pain...
These characterizations are almost as good as this little kid...
And; almost as effective.
Then stay away from pigs.
They don’t read their bible much away; so the farmer has to explain it to them at slop time.
I have personally corrected elsie on this twice. Protestants will never allow the facts to get in the way of their opinion.
That’s what I keep telling some folks; but they want to take it personally anyway.
What version/ translation did he have and what was he doing with it. There is more to this story than you are telling.
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.