To: Mr Rogers
If I say my daughter is the light of my life, do I need to take her with me at night to light the path before me?
Jesus is not using a metaphor here. When Christ said that His disciples must eat His body and drink His blood, many walked away from Him. If he was just speaking metaphorically, no one would have been shocked enough to walk out on Him.
Why would the Jews scoff at Jesus for using a metaphor, unless He literally meant to eat His Flesh and to drink His Blood?
When you say your daughter is the light of your life, no one walks away from you saying, "You're out of your mind -- you could never use her as a flashlight -- I'm out of here." Of course not, because you are obviously using a metaphor. If Christ was similarly using metaphorical language, then why did many of His disciples abandon Him?
There is clear, Scriptural evidence for the literal interpretation. Look to the context of John 6. When the Jews scoff at Jesus for telling His disciples to eat His Flesh and drink His blod, he responds with a clarification that indicates he is speaking literally and not figuratively:
From John 6:52-53:
The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man giveus his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
The Jews expressed disbelief and admonished Christ--believing He could not really mean what He was saying. Now this would have been an excellent opportunity for Jesus to tell them he was only speaking metaphorically or figuratively and that he should not be taken literally. But no, He does not do that! On the contrary. Instead, He responds to their doubts and mocking by repeated the same thing -- that they are to eat His Flesh and drink His blood -- but now he sharpens and strengthens His language. He tells them that if they do not eat His Flesh and Drink His blood, they will have no life in them. See John 6:53. Why would He say that unless He was speaking literally and not figuratively? Why would He confuse them rather than clarify His intentions? Because clearly He meant that they must ACTUALLY and NOT FIGURATIVELY eat His Flesh and Drink His blood.
This becomes more evident when we consider John 6:54, where the terms in the Bible switch from the word phago, which means "eat," to the word trogo, which means to "chew" or "gnaw." The switch to the latter terminology, again, is a move to an even more literal and less figurative manner of speaking, which again undeniably supports the doctrine of the Real Presence.
In the original Greek text of John 6:23-53, the word "eat" (phago) is used nine different times. But then suddenly, after the Jews express doubt about the literal meaning of His statement and assume He is speaking more metaphorically, He clarifies that He is not at all speaking metaphorically; so that in John 6:54, he uses the stronger, more graphic and less metaphorical term "chew" or gnaw" (trogo).
It can be easily validated that the term trogo was not used figuratively in the Scripture. In Matthew 24:38, the same word, trogo, is used to literally mean, 'to eat.' Same thing in John 13:18.
John 6:54-56- Whosoever eateth [trogo] my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth [trogo] my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
So, the clear Biblical meaning--as the early Church Fathers simply took for granted--is the literal meaning of the Real Presence in the Eucharist. Christ is literally present--Body, Soul and Divinity--in the Eucharist.
God bless. :)
posted on 06/13/2009 6:46:06 PM PDT
(The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
"Jesus is not using a metaphor here. When Christ said that His disciples must eat His body and drink His blood, many walked away from Him. If he was just speaking metaphorically, no one would have been shocked enough to walk out on Him.
Why would the Jews scoff at Jesus for using a metaphor, unless He literally meant to eat His Flesh and to drink His Blood?"
Actually, literally or figuratively, it was a shocking statement. In effect, Jesus was claiming to be God Himself, which would stun any Jew listening. If they had interpreted him literally, they would have replied, "You want us to take knives out and cut your flesh, and eat it? Cut your throat, and drink your blood?!?!"
If meant literally, his statement WOULD have been totally mad, since they would have needed to kill him on the spot.
posted on 06/13/2009 6:56:59 PM PDT
by Mr Rogers
(I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
Which Catholic dogma comes from this verse? Or how about this one:
I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
The fact is, we are told how the local church is to observe the Lord’s Supper in I Corinthians 11 and Luke 22.
And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
(24) And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
(25) After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
(26) For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.
Very clearly, the Lord’s Supper is to bring us into remembrance. That is what the very scriptures say. Like it says in verse 26, “ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.” It is a picture of his death, and also to bring us into remembrance that He is coming back for his own.
The Catholics have this completely wrong and in fact break scripture by believing they are constantly sacrificing Christ in the Eucharist. Please compare these verses to Catholic tradition.
(12) But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
(13) From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
(14) For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
I am very sorry to tell you so, but I’ll easily take what the scriptures have clearly put forth over the quotes of the commentators of that same scripture.
Y’all are simply not bring Christ down every eucharist to eat his body and blood. He is sitting on the right hand of the Father, waiting for the time of his return as the conquering Christ.
The Jews expressed disbelief and admonished Christ--believing He could not really mean what He was saying. Now this would have been an excellent opportunity for Jesus to tell them he was only speaking metaphorically or figuratively and that he should not be taken literally.
You either don't understand the discourse or you don't accept it...You guys always leave out the salient part of the context...
Jesus said He already knew these people would not believe Him...He KNEW these people would not follow Him either way...
Jesus ALWAYS spoke to committed unbelievers in parables...ONLY explaining the parable to His true disciples when in private...
If you know the bible at all, you know that...
posted on 06/13/2009 11:10:54 PM PDT
(I don't understand all that I know...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson