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,
you mention several old testament prohibitions against drinking blood....O.K., but are still under old testament laws when Christ gives us the direct order to eat of the flesh of the son of man and drink of his blood?????
you say that the church kept writings but so did others......how many copies of the original writings do you suppose there were??? If the church had the writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as well as the apostles, that pretty much wraps it up. There were no others that had original and accepted writings of any kind. Things like the dead sea scrolls merely indicated that the old testament books were correct as we already knew them from official sources.
the Catholic church, like it or not, is the only source that you have for the new testament books. The old testament would have undoubtedly have been brought up to date and preserved by the Jews, but the Catholic church did that for you also....Be thankful...without the Catholic church you wouldn't even know what a bible was....in fact there wouldn't be a bible for you to know.
“Thanks for the FYI regarding the Jewish betrothal ritual. The symbolism is amazing!”
Yep. And it puts Paul’s words in context when he talks about the relationship between a husband and wife being like the relationship between Christ and His church.
Now, if you look in Revelation, the woman riding the red beast is holding a cup in her hand, but she refuses to drink. That woman is Israel’s apostate priesthood.
all popes, so far, have had normal human frailties...however, isn't it amazing that in spite of their weaknesses, not one of them has ever erred in matters of faith and morals....just as Christ promised!!!
Would you happen to have a link, this sounds fascinating.
>> “the Catholic church, like it or not, is the only source that you have for the new testament books” <<
. That is absolute vomit!
The gospels and the letters had gone around the world 200 years before the Roman Catholic church was founded by Constantine, the brutal pagan destroyer.
Yep. Read what Paul wrote in Galatians:
But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, Galatians 4:4 Christ was born under the Law of Moses to fulfill the Law of Moses.
so, let's see, if you call yourself the church of Jesus Crist of latter day saints, or the church of Christ scientist, you are a Christian church, but if you are Divine Savior, or Holy Redeemer, you are not because Christ's name is not on your building......here in our town we have bethel bible church, bethlehem baptist, burton church, calvary lutheran, Camden united Methodist, church of the heartland, crosswind methodist, faith lutheran, first baptist.....tabernaclechurch, skinner worship chapel.....what's your point, that you can't be a Christian church unless Jesus' name is on the door....please
but God hasn't let up on the Catholic Church yet....after we brought the bible through the ages, protested it , hand copied it, and gave it to humanity.....He throws the protestant revolution at us....will opposition to true Christianity never end???
I majored in history and know how to read it, I'm a Catholic and we gave you the bible that you are reading....I've read it also.
basically I didn't like the elimination of Latin as a universal language so that the Mass was the same throughout the world....I liked the old Communion rail and the more formal stmosphere...If they elect me Pope, I would be a great one, I'm great at everything that I do!!! (Just don't be a BAD one...)
who's the guy in the picture at post 241???
FOTFLOL!!!!!!!!
Is there no evil which a pope can commit that won't be condemned by Catholics?
And yet televangelists are regularly castigated by FRoman Catholics for far less corruption and immorality than many of the popes have been, and all we hear when it's the popes that *they're just human* and *Hey, we all sin*.
It's no wonder your church is such a mess. Nobody in it is willing to take a stand against the sin within.
to suggest for a moment that there were other Christian groups than Catholics before the revolution is to be sadly mislead.
From where did they get their writings and scriptures, who carried their groups beliefs forward, how did they differ from Catholics and why??? If you were a true christian before the revolution, you were a Catholic....in fact if you are a true Christian after the revolution, you are still a Catholic.
Yup. They were still under the Law until Jesus died and the curtain of the Temple was torn in two.
Jesus could not have commanded anyone to break the Law and still remain sinless to be the sacrifice for our sins.
If He had sinned, it would have blown everything.
So, no, He could not have told them to drink blood and no, He could not have changed the Law.
I love the way that protestants never ever let the facts or truth get in the way of their opinions.
that is absolutely correct...they leave the false religion, or none at all, and join the Catholic church where they belong....WELCOME HOME !!!!!!!!
The prohibition is very specific. If you were ever really Catholic you would know this.
I love the way that pagan catholics never ever let the facts or truth get in the way of their bead counting paganism.
The brutal slayings of the followers of Yeshua for keeping his sabbath, the slayings of hundreds of Rabbis for celebrating Yehova’s feasts, and for saying his name, all tell us what we need to know about the catholic ‘church.’
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.