Posted on 11/30/2016 2:41:47 PM PST by SeekAndFind
A Canadian study has found that Mainline Protestant churches that have both modern worship services and teach a literal interpretation of the Bible grow faster.
(Photo: Reuters/John Gress)A parishioner cries as he signs a song of worship in the 7,000-seat Willow Creek Community church during a Sunday service in South Barrington, Illinois, November 20, 2005. Institutions like Willow Creek and Houston's Lakewood Church, each drawing 20,000 or more on a weekend, offer not just a vast, shared attraction but a path that tries to link individuals on a faith-sustaining one-to-one level beyond the crowd, observers and worshipers say.
The Canadian researchers who authored the study, "Theology Matters: Comparing the Traits of Growing and Declining Mainline Protestant Church Attendees and Clergy," surveyed 2,225 churchgoers in Ontario, Canada, and interviewed 29 clergy and 195 congregants. The study will be published in next month's issue of the Review of Religious Research.
"This study was important because it quantified empirically something that evangelical renewalists have been saying for decades — theology matters," said the Rev. Tom Lambrecht, vice president and general manager of Good News Magazine, a United Methodist publication, in an interview with The Christian Post.
Lambrecht, who served for 29 years as a United Methodist minister in Wisconsin, told CP that people who are interested in the things of God "want spiritual substance, not just a feel-good message or the opportunity to engage in community service." The Church, he said, has to to be distinct from and offer more than local civic associations and charities.
A solidly Orthodox Gospel that motivates churches to adapt their worship life and ministries to engage the next generation more effectively will be one where the message remains the same, but the means of delivery look different.
The study also showed that services at growing "churches featured contemporary worship with drums and guitars, while declining churches favoured traditional styles of worship with organ and choir."
"The use of contemporary Christian worship music is an example of that adaptation," Lambrecht said. "It has been around for over 40 years, yet some churches still resist making that adaptation." He added, however, that he's seen examples of churches that have more traditional styles of worship that are also yielding growth.
Pastor John Daffern who leads a Southern Baptist congregation in Columbus, Mississippi, calls himself "an apologist for the modern church."
(Photo: Chris Ellis Photograhpy)Josh Daffern, pastor of MTV Church in Columbus, Mississippi.
"I pastor a church that fits that mold," said Daffern, who leads MTV Church, in a recent interview with CP after he read some of the study's findings.
"We are theologically conservative, according to that study, and yet we are unashamedly modern and we are in a sustained period of growth in our church, and that is in direct contrast to many of the Mainline churches and even some evangelical churches.
"And I think the wisdom of that study is the two parts. There does need to be a modern sense of an expression of the faith while at the same time a conservative, Orthodox view of Christianity," he added.
Daffern said he believes that what church growth comes down to is how man-made controls are applied and both liberals and conservatives do that in their own way.
"For those who would say that we want to liberalize the tenets of Christianity and pick and choose which parts we are comfortable with and which parts we aren't, that's man exerting control over the theology," Daffern said.
"In the same way, a conservative theology yet a traditional approach is still trying to exert man-made control over religion, but it's not over the theology but over the cultural expression," which amounts to an approach which he describes as leaders saying, "Hey, we're going to stick to the Bible but we're going to pretend that it is the 1950s or the 1960s."
Those man-made controls rob the supernatural aspect out of Christian faith, he asserted.
Lead researcher of the study, David Haskell, said in an interview with The Guardian earlier this month that Christians who rely on a fairly literal interpretation of the Bible, "are profoundly convinced of [the] life-saving, life-altering benefits that only their faith can provide, [and] they are motivated by emotions of compassion and concern to recruit family, friends and acquaintances into their faith and into their church."
The study also found that only half of the clergy interviewed who are presiding over declining churches agreed that it was "very important to encourage non-Christians to become Christians," whereas every member of the clergy in a growing church felt that way.
A whopping 93 percent of clergy and 83 percent of worshipers from growing churches believed in the literal bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, compared to 67 percent of worshipers and 56 percent of clergy from declining churches. One hundred percent of clergy and 90 percent of worshipers from growing churches believe God does miracles in response to prayer, whereas only 44 percent of clergy and 80 percent of worshipers from declining churches say so.
"One of the reasons that people are drawn to modern churches is because people don't want to be part of a monument." Daffern asserted. "They want to be part of a movement. One of the greatest beauties of Christianity is that it is living and active."
"In my world, as a Southern Baptist pastor, I tend to deal with churches that have a conservative view of the Bible yet a very traditional mindset, often times it is monument to a bygone era of what they imagine to be the golden age' of Christianity in America."
Such churches are perfectly poised to come back were the 1950s ever to return, he mused.
However, the problem with some more modern churches, he added, is that people sometimes make the modern expression itself an idol of sorts.
"But the key is to be modern enough while not being a mere imitation of everything else around in culture."
IF your heart sought God you would read the rest of HIS WORD and place the passage in John 6 in that context. But you are all about finding some ‘escape clause’ where you can have some glory for your works to strive for salvation. Jesus has already pronounced HIS judgment upon such a mindset ... he will say in that day, ‘depart from me, I never knew you.’ You cannot ingest God’s Spirit by imagining bread and wine are the actual, real flesh and blood of JESUS. God is Spirit, and must be worshipped in spirit and truth, not magic thinking and idol worshipping.
Indeed. The only thing i would change (outside of some minor grammatical mistakes) is regards "even the notes to the NAB concur with" as meaning that while they say "discerning the body" "must mean understanding the sense of Jesus' death, (⇒ 1 Cor 11:26), perceiving the imperative to unity [of the body] that follows from the fact that Jesus gives himself to all and requires us to repeat his sacrifice in the same spirit (⇒ 1 Cor 11:18-25)" supports what i said that Paul's censure was that they were not showing the Lords death in that same spirit, because they were ignoring other members of the Lord's body which He identifies Himself with, thus not recognizing the body of Christ as being so.
Which is what Paul as Saul failed to do, and thus was charged by the Lord with persecuting Christ Himself, (Acts 9:4) and refers the church as the body about 20 times in 1 Co. alone. To remember the Lord's body which was crucified for us is to remember the church which He purchased with His sinless shed blood, (Acts 20:28) treating its members as being bought with that incomparable price, which many of the Corinthians were not doing, thus they actually did not come together to eat the Lord's supper, and which Paul censures them for, and not of some failure to believe in transubstantiation.
While in Catholicism one can be said to partake of the Lord's supper even if he wants little or no interaction with others, and may even prefer to eat alone and shows little concern for others, in Scripture such a one is actually not coming to eat the Lord's supper. And the same applies to any such Protestants.
Moreover, if anything, the church as the body of Christ is what conforms most to the incarnated Christ versus some inanimate objects which do not look, taste, small or would scientifically test as real flesh and blood. For Scripture does not call souls to believe in a Christ that looks like an inanimate object, but invokes His manifest physicality - which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it,..." (1 John 1:1-2)
And while Christ does not feel the pain of someone chewing up His body as the Eucharist, He does feel the pains of His persecuted church.
Which is simply more idiocy . You do not prove what Jn. 6 means, including "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (John 6:63) by simply quoting it in isolation and throwing a tantrum when challenged by interpretive texts. One could do the same thing with David plainly declaring water was the blood of men and thus pouring it out unto the Lord, or that John the Baptist was really "this is" Elijah.
The manifest Fact is the rest of Scripture nowhere supports spiritual life being obtained by literally physically eating anything, but by effectually receiving the words of Christ in heart, which are what the NT church in Scripture confirms to be "milk" and "meat" which nourishes and builds up believers.
But why should we waste time with manifestly immature and unreasonable cultic devotees?
Mathew 26:26-28
Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, ad gave t to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.”
And he took a chalice, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them saying, “Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
In examining this we see that Christ, in instituting the Eucharist, established a new covenant.
A covenant must be clear, therefore a metaphorical sense which is difficult to understand is excluded.
Also, after His Resurrection, He never modified His words.
Thus, if he only intended the metaphorical sense, many of his disciples have for years been practicing idolatry, adoring as the true body of the Lord, what was and is nothing but bread.
Beginning with John 6:51 and through 6:67:
“The bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.
The The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood, hath everlasting life; and I will raise him up in the last day.
For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed.
He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.
(From the nature of the words used in V 56 “true, real meat,” “true, real drink”’ “Caro enim mea vere est cibus: et sanguis meus, vere est potus:” The obvious meaning is the literal one.)
As the living Father has sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eats me the same also shall live by me.
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eats this bread shall live forever.”
“Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard,’ and who can hear it?
But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?
If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
It is the spirit that quickens: the flesh profits nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.
But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that, would betray him
And he said: Therefore did I say to you, that no man can come to me, unless it be given him by my Father.
After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him.
Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away?
St. Paul wrote (eight years after St. Matthew wrote his Gospel) a letter to the Christian converts at Corinth: 1Cor. 10:16, “The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?”
1Cor. 11:23- 29, “For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread, And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me. For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until He come. Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.”
All attempts to drag in other references in an attempt to disguise Christ’s real meaning in these self-evident passages are disingenuous.
You are twisting GOD's Word to fit your deceptions. That is a clear sign of antichrist operating, operating in and through you! You are working for the wrong side, spiritually. Run along. Maybe God will mercifully open your closed and shuttered spiritual eyes ... or not; He does give some up to their strong delusions, sent from satan.
Deceived by quotes from Christ?
Not me!
“Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood, hath everlasting life; and I will raise him up in the last day.
For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed.
He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.
so he that eats me the same also shall live by me.”
Matt 26: 26 - 29 : 26 While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” 27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; 28for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. 29 “But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.”
Are you pretending that Christ’s reference to “fruit of the vine” in verse 29 somehow alters His earlier reference to His Body and Blood?
You are wrong still.
The blood is poured out for the atonement. It was never to be consumed.
Claiming that we are now required to eat the blood contradicts the whole weight and body of teaching Scripture God gave us and requires up all kinds of verbal and mental gymnastics to justify.
Interpreting the Last Supper to be symbolic only, AS THE PASSOVER WAS, causes no issues with interpretation or contradiction.
MHG's point is valid. Jesus was drinking wine as He said He was drinking.
If Jesus had drank blood, He would have broken the Law and not fulfilled it as He said, thus making Him a law breaker and incapable of being the spotless Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.
Don't eat the blood, the life is in the blood
Genesis 9:4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life , that is, its blood.
Leviticus 3:17 It shall be a statute forever throughout your generations, in all your dwelling places, that you eat neither fat nor blood.”
Leviticus 7:26-27 Moreover, you shall eat no blood whatever, whether of fowl or of animal, in any of your dwelling places. Whoever eats any blood, that person shall be cut off from his people.”
Leviticus 17:10-14 “If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood.
“Any one also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.
Leviticus 19:26 “You shall not eat any flesh with the blood in it. You shall not interpret omens or tell fortunes.
Deuteronomy 12:16 Only you shall not eat the blood ; you shall pour it out on the earth like water.
Deuteronomy 12:23 Only be sure that you do not eat the blood, for the blood is the life , and you shall not eat the life with the flesh.
Deuteronomy 15:23 Only you shall not eat its blood; you shall pour it out on the ground like water.
Acts 15:12-29 And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. After they finished speaking, James replied, “Brothers, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written,
“‘After this I will return, and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen; I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from of old.’
Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”
Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brothers, with the following letter:
“The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”
Matthew 26:29 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.”
Mark 14:25 Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”
Luke 22:18 For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”
John 6:63 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.
Keep up the good works brothers and sisters. Keep telling the truth, even if some don't want to hear it. We conduct Bible studies, and specifically invite Catholics. It's always interesting. 😃😀😄
The meaning of such words and Jn. 6 are the issue, and which require more than simply asserting what they mean. If you are actually going to try to present an argument for them, based on reason-ably contextually examining such and in the light of the rest of Scripture then i will give you a chance to do so and be responded to.
In examining this we see that Christ, in instituting the Eucharist, established a new covenant. A covenant must be clear, therefore a metaphorical sense which is difficult to understand is excluded.
And which is absurd! If anything is hard to understand, it is how "my body which is broken [crucified] for you" and blood which is "shed for many" is something that is radically unlike the body and blood of the Christ that was manifestly incarnated, as John especially emphasized. (1Jn. 1:1,2)
And instead of this manifestly incarnated Christ, we have a Christ that looks, tastes, smells and would scientifically test as mere bread and wine!
This would certainly be as hard to understand as teaching that a baked potato was actually God. That the bread and wine became the actual bloody flesh and flowing blood of Christ would be the plainly literal sense of a "this is My body and blood that is to be slain and shed" statement, versus some radically new and novel form, but then it would be very hard for these as yet kosher (Acts 10:9-14) apostles to consume literal flesh and blood. The idea the kosher and often dense and questioning disciples would blithely consume the body and blood of Christ without protest is itself absurd.
In contrast, the metaphorical sense is what is easy to understand for a OT Jew, as it is no more hard to understand that the many other examples of metaphorical uses of eating or drinking, including men being called "bread for Israel" and water being called the blood of men, (Num. 14:9), (2 Samuel 23:16-17) and many other examples that were provided for you .
Also, after His Resurrection, He never modified His words. Thus, if he only intended the metaphorical sense, many of his disciples have for years been practicing idolatry, adoring as the true body of the Lord, what was and is nothing but bread.
This is true, if in fact they do so, and of Mary also, like as Israelites ended up offering incense to the bronze serpent that God had used. (22Ki. 18:14)
Yet idolatry is making anything created your highest object of spiritual affection, or source of security, or object of allegiance, at least at the time, and thus most all Christians are sometimes idolators (esp, at dinnertime).
Beginning with John 6:51 and through 6:67:
So you are once again resorting to merely quoting the texts at issue as if that determined their meaning?! Try to comprehend this, as once again you are simply begging the question, meaning assuming what needs to be proved.
St. Paul wrote (eight years after St. Matthew wrote his Gospel) a letter to the Christian converts at Corinth: 1Cor. 10:16, “The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?”
The word you have translated as "partaking" is 1 Corinthians 10:16 and means "fellowship/communion and as the next verse explains, "For we being many are one bread, and one body : for we are all partakers of that one bread." (1 Corinthians 10:17)
The text explains that the church is "one bread" and "one body," in communion with Christ by eating the Lord's supper together, like as pagans have fellowship/communion with devils by taking part in their dedicatory feasts. Which fellowship the Corinthians would also be having if they took part in the same with them, but which fellowship was not be eating the flesh of demons:
But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils. (1 Corinthians 10:20-21)
Thus what we have here is but fellowship with Christ by a communal meal in remembrance of death by His body which He bought with His blood, and which is analogous to the fellowship pagans have with the object of their worship in their dedicatory feasts.
And which was already explained to you, yet once again you simply repost the same!
1Cor. 11:23- 29,
Which also was carefully explained to you, yet somehow you seem to imagine that simply posting the text again and again solves your problem that sound refutation results in!
All attempts to drag in other references in an attempt to disguise Christ’s real meaning in these self-evident passages are disingenuous.
Which response even further marginalizes you, if you could go any further. Insisting that this is selected portion self-evident and rejecting what contextual examination shows, as well as the light of other texts simply confirms that you are like a devoted cultist who is unfit for further attempts as reasoned debate.
Yes, we’ve had this discussion before where are unable to recognize the difference in the New Covenant of the New Testament.
Mathew 26:26-28
Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, ad gave t to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.”
And he took a chalice, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them saying, “Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
In examining this we see that Christ, in instituting the Eucharist, established a new covenant.
A covenant must be clear, therefore a metaphorical sense which is difficult to understand is excluded.
Also, after His Resurrection, He never modified His words.
Thus, if he only intended the metaphorical sense, many of his disciples have for years been practicing idolatry, adoring as the true body of the Lord, what was and is nothing but bread.
Beginning with John 6:51 and through 6:67:
“The bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.
The The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood, hath everlasting life; and I will raise him up in the last day.
For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed.
He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.
(From the nature of the words used in V 56 “true, real meat,” “true, real drink”’ “Caro enim mea vere est cibus: et sanguis meus, vere est potus:” The obvious meaning is the literal one.)
As the living Father has sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eats me the same also shall live by me.
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eats this bread shall live forever.”
“Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard,’ and who can hear it?
But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?
If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
It is the spirit that quickens: the flesh profits nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.
But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that, would betray him
And he said: Therefore did I say to you, that no man can come to me, unless it be given him by my Father.
After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him.
Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away?
St. Paul wrote (eight years after St. Matthew wrote his Gospel) a letter to the Christian converts at Corinth: 1Cor. 10:16, “The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?”
1Cor. 11:23- 29, “For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread, And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me. For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until He come. Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.”
All attempts to drag in other references in an attempt to disguise Christ’s real meaning in these self-evident passages are disingenuous.
So...you read all of this and still deny the clear meaning?
Mathew 26:26-28
Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, ad gave t to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.”
And he took a chalice, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them saying, “Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
In examining this we see that Christ, in instituting the Eucharist, established a new covenant.
A covenant must be clear, therefore a metaphorical sense which is difficult to understand is excluded.
Also, after His Resurrection, He never modified His words.
Thus, if he only intended the metaphorical sense, many of his disciples have for years been practicing idolatry, adoring as the true body of the Lord, what was and is nothing but bread.
Beginning with John 6:51 and through 6:67:
“The bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.
The The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood, hath everlasting life; and I will raise him up in the last day.
For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed.
He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.
(From the nature of the words used in V 56 “true, real meat,” “true, real drink”’ “Caro enim mea vere est cibus: et sanguis meus, vere est potus:” The obvious meaning is the literal one.)
As the living Father has sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eats me the same also shall live by me.
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eats this bread shall live forever.”
“Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard,’ and who can hear it?
But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?
If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
It is the spirit that quickens: the flesh profits nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.
But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that, would betray him
And he said: Therefore did I say to you, that no man can come to me, unless it be given him by my Father.
After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him.
Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away?
St. Paul wrote (eight years after St. Matthew wrote his Gospel) a letter to the Christian converts at Corinth: 1Cor. 10:16, “The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?”
1Cor. 11:23- 29, “For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread, And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me. For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until He come. Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.”
All attempts to drag in other references in an attempt to disguise Christ’s real meaning in these self-evident passages are disingenuous.
Ya, that’s why I included this:
(From the nature of the words used in V 56 “true, real meat,” “true, real drink”’ “Caro enim mea vere est cibus: et sanguis meus, vere est potus:” The obvious meaning is the literal one.)
” meaning assuming what needs to be proved”
How much of Scripture do you apply this nonsense to?
When Satan quotes Scripture he ignores Christ’s clear meaning in 8 clear declarations, including the one preceded by “Amen, Amen, I say to you...”.
All attempts to LEAVE OUT other references in an attempt to disguise Christ’s real meaning in these passages is sophistry.
Naw, you're the one being disingenuous...God did not write only the scriptures your religion likes to glom on to...He wrote 'em all...
When God tells his people they have to drink blood for salvation and at the same time tells the same people they can not drink blood under any circumstances, there's a problem...One statement can be a metaphor or they can both be a metaphor, but they both can not be literal...And if you don't accept that, you're being disingenuous...
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.