You are satisfied with your own interpretation and are also quite satisfied that it contradicts your beliefs about a bodily resurrection.I don't believe that JESUS was dealing with the issue of ressurection in the original citation from the John 6 passage. Do you think He was ?
All I did was ask you if Jesus saying something is "spirit" means that it is "symbolic." You have not been able or willing to entertain the thought. You accept that "spirit" equals "symbolic" dogmatically. That is fine.
I don't believe I used the word 'symbolic' or entertained the concept. Do you think that I did ?
What I did do was to make the point that JESUS was encouraging and emphasizing SPIRITUALITY in the John 6 passage, as opposed to PHYSICALITY. He begins this emphasis in verse 26 of the passage and continues with it until the end of the chapter.
I don't believe I used the word 'symbolic' or entertained the concept. Do you think that I did ?
Uh, yeah. Think about it. The Lord says "My flesh is true food" and "If you don't eat my flesh and drink my blood you have no life within you."
We take that literally.
You cite a later verse about the "words" being "spirit" in order to come up with an interpretation that is non-literal. I don't see how this is anything other than symbolic, if it is not literal.
Every time this is discussed, the same verse is used to try to negate everything Jesus said. I don't understand why, so I ask. We are told that the "flesh" does not profit.
You yourself say this does not refer to the resurrection of the body. Then to what does it refer? Certainly not to Jesus' flesh, given "for the life of the world?"
Likewise we are told, over and over, that the "words" are "spirit," as if this is self-explanatory that the preceding verses are not to be taken in a literal fashion.
So I ask why "words" being "spirit" precludes a more literal interpretation of the preceding. Why? Logically, linguistically, why?
What I did do was to make the point that JESUS was encouraging and emphasizing SPIRITUALITY in the John 6 passage, as opposed to PHYSICALITY. He begins this emphasis in verse 26 of the passage and continues with it until the end of the chapter.
OK. And why can this "spirituality" not include the belief in the Presence of Jesus in the elements of Communion? It certainly is not something that is discerned by the human eye, or by our PHYSICAL scientific instruments. It is something discerned by faith, discerned by and for the spiritual part of our nature. The "flesh," our bodies, do not profit any more than a small cracker and a sip of wine nourish our flesh. But our SPIRIT profits greatly from this action.
SD