Posted on 02/23/2016 8:17:35 AM PST by Salvation
You mean, explain my “mocking Christ in His Church every time no one even asked you to”? I am referring to behavior that I frequently observe in Protestants who can’t seem to ever stop with their protests, whether anyone asked for their opinions or not.
Are you choosing my apostolates for me? Laughing at Protestantism is not the only thing I do. Nor is it without fruit.
Calling people animals is a well-established method of allegorical speech; saying “eat, this is my body” has no such precedent and was not taken allegorically by anyone listening. The whole group of disciples left because Jesus insisted He was not speaking in allegories in John 6.
I don’t agree with your opinion, thanks for sharing.
Just to clarify......
You don’t believe that Jesus was sinless.
Correct?
That is ... blasphemous, to accuse Jesus of serving to His disciples His blood even before the sacrifice on the Cross, is, well, sick blasphemy of catholiciism.
Consubstantiation makes the most sense to me. A lifelong conservative Lutheran, we have always been taught that IN WITH and UNDER the elements of bread and wine, the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present.
Consubstantiation makes no more sense than paedobaptism and/or baptismal regeneration. Neither of these positions were held by the New Testament churches. So is removal of autonomy from the local Body of Christ, the local church, which independence characterized all first-century New Testament churches.
When He instituted His supper and said This is my Body, the is would be implied in the greek and not necessary to specifically add.
If, as your username suggests, you are a medical practitioner, you must have some grasp of Latin and at least classical Greek. The verb "to be", conjugated in the present tense, active voice, indicative mode, third person singular, is translated "it is" with the sense of continuity; and is inseparable from the clauses "this (it) is the body of me" and "this (it) is the blood of me."
The "is" is explicit, not implicit. The "it" is implicit, not translated, where "this" is the neuter referred to by the verb.
However the disciple that wrote the Gospel specifically added the IS for emphasis.
Doc, this is a grave doctrinal flaw, an overstatement of your understanding of how the ew Testament was written, and does violence to the concept of infallible verbal plenary inspiration of the text by the Holy Spirit. If it were a fact (and it is not) that the disciple (which one?) who wrote the Gospel (which Gospel?) specifically added (see the warnings in both Testaments, Deut. 4:2, Rev. 22:18) the key conjugated verb, then two other disciples must have done the same,. all providing uninspired changes to the Scripture--the graphe--contrary to the will of God's Holy Spirit. To make this presumptuous statement ought to terrify you, especially in remarking on Jesus' delivery of a central doctrine and ordinance of the New Covenant to His first church.
However we fully believe what Christ says about His Supper - that He physically touches us and nourishes us in His Supper with His own Body and Blood.
He physically touches you during the process of this ordinance? Hmm. Hear voices, eh? Well, we know what the DSM-IV has to say about that, don't we, Doc?
Come now, let us reason together. In this several sins are compassed. While Christ isin my assembly and in me (the word "Christ" here being a synechdoche for His total culture) spiritually, which continual presence is the hope of Glory (Col. 1:27); His Body and Blood, thus His physical Self, is in Heaven, seated at the right hand of The Father. If your senses really tell you that He physically now reaches into this temporal sphere and actually touches you, it's time to either take up golf and ask Him to help you with your game, orwe should put you into the hands of a psychiatrist, eh?
According to the wise commentator, Adam Clarke:
". . . the design of the Gospel is to put men in possession of the Spirit and power of Christ, to make them partakers of the Divine nature, and thus prepare them for an eternal union with himself. Should it be said that the preposition εν should be translated among, it amounts to the same; for Christ was among them, to enlighten, quicken, purify, and refine them, and this he could not do without dwelling in them."
If this is the case, Doc--then you're OK, but you need to be a little less certain about your Biblical underpinnings and keep to what you know, OK?
However we fully believe what Christ says about His Supper - that He physically touches us and nourishes us in His Supper with His own Body and Blood. How can this be? I do not know, but I don’t need to know how a radio works to use it either. I would not expect to fully comprehend one of God’s greatest gifts to us.
No, He never said that about His Supper, though some in misinterpretation have come to a very iffy and incorrect conclusion. And it is something you know nothing about, per your own admission, so at least go to your pastor and get filled in. That is an opinion you need to take under advisement.
But to say it is merely metaphorical or allegorical I think is to lose some of the richness of the Sacrament.
"This is my body/blood" is entirely figurative-literal language, entirely metaphorical, and most certainly not allegorical (look up the definitions when you use them--remember your English Lit classes) to the first-century educated user of the common, very precise Koine Greek language. Jesus had trained his chosen disciples--the Company of the Committed--for three and a half years in the richness of the use of literal interpretation of the literal and figurative-literal passages of the Tanach, and supplemented this written resource with his own oral tradition of parables, to illustrate practical applications of New Covenant theology for his budding teachers of the New Way of relating to God through Him..
This is an area in which you need to bring yourself up to date, Doc, if you want to be a religious diagnostician. I urge you to keep it up, though. Don't be discouraged.
(observations from a Ph. D., who really is your FRiend)
I'd like to know exactly how/what He did that was worthy of the charge of blasphemy from our catholic posters?
It is astonishing to see such a blasphemy posted for the whole world to read. The Lamb of God -in catholiciism- is not sinless and even made His disciple to sin the night before He went to the cross! ... which would be a grievous sin by Jesus, making Him unfit as The Lamb of God. And THAT is why I call it blasphemous.
To compound their error, they certainly seem to ignore the other accounts where we actually have the Lord and His disciples taking Communion.
Biblical context is not their friend it seems.
If they read to the end they would see the question Jesus asked the disciples....and what was their answer?
"And we have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God."
Notice no correction by Jesus of this.
Latter in the same Gospel by John we have the account of doubting Thomas.
So that Thomas would not be an unbeliever what did Jesus say to him?
"Here, eat my flesh?" No.
"Reach here your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand, and put it into My side; and be not unbelieving, but believing."
It's always been through faith/belief that one comes to have salvation through Christ.
:-)
And I am under strict instructions to smack him upside the head if he so much as glances towards Rome!
Oh brother!
The “blasphamy” was claiming, rightfully of course, to be God. Nothing else.
Affirmarive sir.
:-)
Christ was sinless. But He did not continue with the Jewish religion and the Eucharist is not Seder, and the Jews did convict Him of blasphemy.
His claim was to be God and that He was a King. On both accounts He is correct.
Send your objections to the three evangelists who describe it.
That He is the Son of God.
I wouldn’t want you to - and neither will I!
No. I mean the “Why, then that Muslim or Atheist or Protestant has a faith in Christ that he, poor thing, cannot articulate.” part.
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.