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,
Hmm, do you have any scripture to back up your position? Let’s see what you’ve got.
>> “You don’t understand spiritual things because you only see the world through eyes of flesh.” <<
.
A masterpiece in projection!
You constantly accuse others of attacks, but yours is an evil masterpiece that belongs in the Religion Forum Hall of Fame.
“So explain to me how Nero was the anti-Christ as preterists believe. Oh, and don’t forget to point out the time of the seven year treaty.”
I would if I thought you were genuinely interested in learning. I suspect, however, doing so would just be a monumental waste of my time and effort.
Galations has nothing to do with the renewal of the covenant.
That is dealt with in Romans.
I found it in my Bible. It’s also in Luther’s abridged Bible. If you read Revelation, how can you disagree with what is below?
The Ark only represents Israel, or the Church, in a secondary sense. Obviously, Mary gave birth to Jesus, the child who would rule with an iron rod, in the primary sense.
And Mary fulfills the typology of the Ark of the Covenant. She is the Ark that appeared in Heaven (Rev 11:19). Remember that chapters were added to the Bible by the Archbishop of Canterbury from 1207-1228, and verses in the fifteenth century. This is why the Ark verse appears right before “the woman” in Revelation.
The Ark contained:
—Aaron’s staff, representing the priesthood.
—Manna, the bread from heaven.
—The Decalogue or Divine Law or Word of God.
Mary contained Jesus within her womb, Who is:
—The eternal high priest
—The Bread of Life that came down from heaven to bring eternal life.
—The Word of God made flesh.
>> “I would if I thought you were genuinely interested in learning. I suspect, however, doing so would just be a monumental waste of my time and effort” <<
.
What a grand Obamaism! - You beat him at his own game.
“You constantly accuse others of attacks, but yours is an evil masterpiece that belongs in the Religion Forum Hall of Fame.”
LOL! You’re a gem! :)
“What a grand Obamaism! - You beat him at his own game.”
If I’m Obama, you’re Debbie Wasserman-Schultz! LOL!
And does this really seem logical?
You misunderstand the astronomical sign.
Betula holds Tsemach (the branch) in her right hand. Zedek, the King (jupiter) is in conjunction. Betula is Israel
Christ didn't renew the Old Covenant: He replaced it!
But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:23-26 If you believe Christ died to renew the Law of Moses, then you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about!
Yes, if you really knew how the catholic church has operated.
We needed another radical Replacementarian here, just to see what has been overcome by the unsealing of Daniel’s multilayered 70 week prophecy.
We need to be constantly reminded.
Now read your own post and see how you have described the traitor Josephus, your idea of a reliable witness.
I’d say the post I cited from Answer In Genesis is a fair and balanced look at Josephus. It’s far more reasoned than your “frothing-at-the-mouth condemnation of him.
“The world loves to rely on Josephusn because he validates the worldly way of life.”
Josephus validates, through eyewitness testimony, many aspects of Jesus’s prophetic sermons. Your inability to understand that places you in a very inclusive “low information” crowd.
>> “Christ didn’t renew the Old Covenant: He replaced it!” <<
.
Thank you for demonstrating that we were correct in our assessment of your attack on the gospel.
Yeah, I didn’t think you dared. Well, how about I start. All ancient sources, both Christian and secular, place the banishment of Christians to
Patmos during the reign of Domitian. Can you find sources that show that they were banished to Patmos during Nero’s reign?
“We needed another radical Replacementarian here...”
You’re the first “Renewalarian” I’ve ever come across. I hope you’re the last.
>> “Josephus validates, through eyewitness testimony, many aspects of Jesus’s prophetic sermons.” <<
.
A criminal unbeliever is needed to validate Yeshua?
Wow! - They’ll go wherever they have to to get their dirt!
“Thank you for demonstrating that we were correct in our assessment of your attack on the gospel.”
I’ll gladly attack your unique gospel any day of the week, since it’s not the one Christ or Paul taught.
>> “Christ didn’t renew the Old Covenant: He replaced it!” <<
.
Ok, so Paul is a liar.
Nice to get that out of the way.
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.