Posted on 08/01/2019 9:03:46 AM PDT by Salvation
For many years, the image I had of St. Paul was that of a bold evangelist who went from town to town teaching and preaching powerfully about Christ. I envisioned his audience mesmerized as he preached and took on his opponents.
I ultimately altered my view a bit based on scriptural descriptions, some of which we are currently reading in the Office of Readings. I have no doubt that he was a brilliant theologian. Paul was reputed to have been one of the greatest students of one of the greatest rabbis of the time, Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). I also do not question his zeal for Christ, and I can picture that fervor reflected on his face as he preached and taught. However, it would seem that Paul was not in fact recognized as a particularly gifted preacher. Consider the following texts from Scripture:
The key element to glean from this passage is that people regarded Paul as rather humble in person but in contrast quite bold and assertive in his letters. This does not paint the picture of a bold, fearsome preacher.
Here is even clearer evidence that some (though surely not all or even most) thought of Paul’s presence and preaching as weak and of no account. The Greek phrase λόγος ἐξουθενημένος (logos exouthenhmenos), translated here as “speech contemptible,” can also be translated as “words or speech of no account,” or “words or speech to be despised.” Of course, because Paul himself is reporting this, he may well be exaggerating the perception of his preaching out of a kind of humility. However, this is further evidence that Paul may not have been a highly gifted or bold preacher, at least from a worldly perspective.
The identity of the “superapostles” is debated, but there is wide agreement that it does not refer to the twelve apostles chosen by Christ. Rather, Paul is likely alluding to itinerant preachers of the time, most of whom were well known for their oratorical skills. Some of them may have been Judaizers who opposed Paul, but it would seem that they could draw a crowd. Perhaps they are somewhat like the revivalists of today. Paul seems to acknowledge that he is not a great speaker but refuses to concede that he is inferior to anyone in knowledge of the faith.
Paul claims no “clever” oratorical skill; rather, he underscores his lack of eloquence to emphasize that the power is in the cross of Christ.
Luke describes Paul as talking “on and on.” The sermon seems to have put the young Eutychus right to sleep, and results in his falling three flights to his death. Paul runs down and raises him from the dead. (All in a night’s work, I guess!) Paul then goes back upstairs to complete the Mass. It is a humorous and touching anecdote in many ways, but it is also a story that illustrates the somewhat soporific effect of Paul’s preaching.
So, it would seem that Paul did not possess great oratorical. This is somewhat surprising given his astonishing missionary accomplishments, but we must avoid superficiality in understanding the power of God’s Word. The power is in God; the battle is His. We may prefer to listen to skilled speakers, but God can write straight with crooked lines and make a way out of no way. If God could speak through Balaam’s donkey (see Num 22:21), He can speak through us, too.
Avoiding Superficiality – As a priest, I work hard to develop my preaching skills because I think the people of God deserve this. In the end, though, none of us should ignore the fact that God can speak in and through the humblest of people and in the most unlikely circumstances. Paul may not have had the rhetorical skills we think he should have had, but he was blessed with many other gifts. He was a brilliant theologian, had amazing zeal and energy, and was committed enough to walk thousands of miles and endure horrible sufferings so that he could proclaim Christ crucified and risen. Paul was also a natural leader and one of the most fruitful evangelizers the Church has ever known. We tend to prize oratorical skill and force of personality, but there is obviously more to evangelizing effectively than eloquence and charisma.
Our culture—particularly since the advent of television, radio, and the Internet—has come to focus primarily on personal magnetism and the ability to “turn a phrase.” The ability to communicate well is surely a great gift, but there are many others as well. In valuing certain gifts over others, we risk injustice and superficiality. The Church needs all our gifts.
What gifts do you have? God can use them!
Somewhat rarely on the part of the more fractious Protestants.
Keep on reading.
63“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.
64“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him.
65And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”
66As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore.
67So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?”
68Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life.
69“We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”
From the poster whose favorite word with those who disagree with him seems to be "troll" LOL!
Jesus told some of His followers, preaching in Israel, before His passion and Death and Resurrection, if any town does not receive you, wipe the dust from your shoes when you leave. etc.
Where did He say for Christians 2000 years later to do this to other believers?
i know’. I just get tired of responding to the same false charges over and over. I have decided to not take the bait on the throwing out books of the Bible and Luther’s sin boldly remark. It’s been refuted so many times in so many threads it just becomes tiresome
Refuting the assertion that the Mass is not the body and blood.
But nice try at sliding the topic.
This entire passage has to be read in context to get the proper meaning.
This passage is about believing in Him....not eating/drinking.
The Jews missed the point much as RCs are missing the point.
IF you have to eat/drink the flesh and blood then Jesus left out something very important to Nicodemus as He did not tell him about this.
Nor did He tell this to the Samaritans.
What He did tell them about though was faith.
John records this numerous times in his Gospel.
Hey, even troll is more charitable than "schismatic" or "heretic."
Look at the language of damnation regularly used by Protestants on these threads.
Do you really want to compare what your denomination has put in its official documents with what is typed on a chat page??
Like I said before....you really don't play this game very well.
I gave the verses VERBATIM upthread.
Quoting the next paragraph does NOT undo it.
Irrelevant: since you made (another) personal disparaging remark, about me, on this thread.
So I responded by contrasting the behaviour of other disputants, on this same thread.
So once again, you slide, obfuscate, insult, throw squid ink into the water.
Irrelevant: since you made (another) personal disparaging remark, about me, on this thread.
Where??? By all means, please show.
So once again, you slide, obfuscate, insult, throw squid ink into the water.
You might want to look in the mirror for that personal diparaging behavior.
I gave the verses VERBATIM upthread.
Quoting the next paragraph does NOT undo it.
IF you quote it in context it does.
He is also quoted as saying to cut out your eye if it causes you to sin.
Have you done so?
Have you cut off your hand as well?
Using your way of understanding Scripture those have to be taken literally.
Well?
********************
But to really understand this passage one has to look at ALL of the occurrences of the Lord's Supper.
*****************************
| Matthew 26:26-29 | Mark 14:22-24 | Luke 22:14-20 | John 13:21-26 | 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 |
| 26While 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.” 27And 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.” |
22While they were eating, He took some bread, and after a blessing He broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is My body.” 23And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, and they all drank from it. 24And He said to them, “This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. 25“Truly I say to you, I will never again drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”. |
14When the hour had come, He reclined at the table, and the apostles with Him. 15And He said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 16for I say to you, I shall never again eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” 17And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, “Take this and share it among yourselves; 18for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes.”19And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 20And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood. |
21When Jesus had said this, He became troubled in spirit, and testified and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, that one of you will betray Me.” 22The disciples began looking at one another, at a loss to know of which one He was speaking.23There was reclining on Jesus’ bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. 24So Simon Peter gestured to him, and said to him, “Tell us who it is of whom He is speaking.” 25He, leaning back thus on Jesus’ bosom, said to Him, “Lord, who is it?” 26Jesus then answered, “That is the one for whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him.” So when He had dipped the morsel, He took and gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. |
23For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. |
Key Phrases/words:
Poured out: In the OT the blood sacrifice was never consumed; it was always poured out. We further have the drink offering which was poured out before God as a sacrifice (Ex 29:40, Numbers 15:4-5).
29.11 ἀνάμνησις, εως f: (derivative of ἀναμιμνῄσκω ‘to cause to remember,’ 29.10) the means for causing someone to remember—‘means of remembering, reminder.’ ἀλλ’ ἐν αὐταῖς ἀνάμνησις ἁμαρτιῶν κατ’ ἐνιαυτόν ‘but in those (sacrifices) there is a yearly reminder of sins’ or ‘… that people have sinned’ He 10:3. Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 347). New York: United Bible Societies.
Posts 68 and 69 this thread.
You might want to look in the mirror for that personal diparaging behavior.
Nope, didn't see any. Just some "diaper raging" by Protties with butthurt -- and that was on the threads, not in the mirror.
Tell ya what, chuckles.
Tell me any other commonly-held throughout Christendom practice, involving the Body and Blood of Jesus, that *ISN'T* Communion / Mass / whatever.
Then maybe you can make a case that Jesus wasn't talking about it in John 6.
I won't wait, troll-boi.
Posts 68 and 69 this thread.
dude...seriously?
Nope, didn't see any. Just some "diaper raging" by Protties with butthurt -- and that was on the threads, not in the mirror.
Continuing to confirm my observation that it is usually the Roman Catholic who resorts to the personal attack and/or profanity when the argument is against them.
Continuing to prove my observation.
Perhaps these open forums are not for you. You might be safer in the caucus threads where there are only two or three RCs who post there.
BUT, you better hope your version of Roman Catholicism aligns with theirs or else they'll turn on you like a rabid dog.
I'm out.
Your understanding of what the Catholic Church teaches is incorrect.
Jesus SOMETIMES uses metaphorical language (parables), but just as often does not. There is no indication, and no belief in the early Church understanding that the language was metaphorical.
How can the Real Presence POSSIBLY "be distorted"? Either the bread and wine become Body and Blood, or it doesn't. Christ says it does. Various Protestants, 1500 years after the fact, says it doesn't, or "metaphorically", or some other waffle. I'll take God at His Word.
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.