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,
It is hard to enjoy what one does not need.
But at least you've shown us that catholics NEED these things to believe they are, in some way, complete.
Good try; if you are speaking to a low information voter; but you ain't.
You are, however, ALLOWED to thank me for providing this illuminating history lesson for our readers here in this thread...
http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/banned.htm
Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.
Who told you this?
SATAN perhaps??
Did it have a link?
Is THIS a clue?
Not according to Salt Lake City!!
“But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.”
The word used there is hierateuma which is never used for leadership of the assemblies of believers.
Hierateuma
the order or body of priests (see ἀδελφότης, αἰχμαλωσία, διασπορά, θεραπεία); so Christians are called, because they have access to God and offer not external but 'spiritual' (πνευματικά) sacrifices: 1 Peter 2:5; also βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα, 1 Peter 2:9 (after Exodus 19:6, the Sept.), priests of kingly rank, i. e. exalted to a moral rank and freedom which exempts them from the control of everyone but God and Christ.[ http://biblesuite.com/thayers/2406.htm]
Once again the RCC has corrupted the meaning of scripture.
>> “Once again the RCC has corrupted the meaning of scripture.” <<
.
We’re duly shocked.
“I guess your seeing eye dog is not trained to detect CATHOLIC slurs directed towards PROTESTants.”
Produce one.
“Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament”
From the web site Catholic Planet:
this site is anti catholic
http://www.hol.com/~mikesch/banned.htm
there is a question in here in which they quote:
The Council of Toulouse made this order:
“We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament”
1. Has this order been superseded? Was the Council wrong? Why is it prohibited for Catholics from owning Bibles?
The Council of Toulouse was not an Ecumenical Council, and its order to prohibit possession of the Bible was under the temporal authority, which even Ecumenical Councils do not exercise infallibly. And their order only applied to the local area under the authority of that local Council. The reason was that certain translations of the Bible were being used to promote a particular heresy (Albigensian heresy). The order was temporary, local, and in my opinion erroneous.
But in any case, the order is often misrepresented by Protestants.
“Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.”
The order applies mainly to translations of the Latin Vulgate. At that time, many of the laity knew Latin, so they could possess the Vulgate for use in the aforementioned devotions. But even so, I think the Council erred in this order. Toulouse should have only condemned certain versions of the Bible, distorted by translation and by the notes (glosses) in order to promote heresy.
Pope Innocent III did not ban the Bible. He sent letters dealing with the same heresies that Toulouse dealt with. He opposed certain translations used to promote those heresies. See this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_t...he_Middle_Ages
and the section called ‘Innocent III and vernacular translations’
Also, he did not say that people are incapable of understanding the Bible.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cum_ex...cto_%281199%29
He objected to certain groups of heretics, who “celebrate their assemblies in secret, usurp for themselves the duty of preaching, mock the simplicity of the priests and reject their community.”
In another letter, Innocent wrote: “You should also seek the truth carefully: who was the author of this translation, what was their intention, what is the faith of those using it, what is the cause of teaching it, if they venerate the apostolic see and the Catholic Church” showing his concern for certain translations (those used to promote heresy).
These letters were a local and temporary exercise of the temporal authority of the Pope. The contents did not apply to the universal Church on earth, nor were these letters to the Bishop of Metz added to Canon Law (as is claimed).
This letter
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ea_est_in_fovendis
also makes it clear that only certain translations were a matter of concern.
__________________
Ron Conte
Roman Catholic theologian
a scribe was a member of a learned class in ancient israel studying scripture and acting as copyists,editors, teachers, and jurists.
nice condemnation of a group of misguided but nevertheless good people.....such a Christian thing to do...
You’re sure full of mumbo-jumbo.
All Israel was required to read and learn the scriptures.
Recitations from memory were done daily. How much of the scriptures can you recite from memory when requested?
Sorry, but real life superceeds your lying catholic websites!
My maternal grandfather was an Italian immigrant from Pioppo that was excommunicated specifically for having a Bible in his posession.
It turned out to be a wonderful blessing, as it resulted in his finding a real church that preached and lived by the word of God, rather than the satanic traditions of the catholic church.
The cascading effect was that his entire family (three brothers, Mother, wife, inlaws, and all 47 of their children) finding Yeshua.
Excommunication fron the RCC means eternal life for most.
The RCC IS blasphemy defined!
Lucifer enjoys eternal life....probably with some excommunicated Catholics...
“My maternal grandfather was an Italian immigrant from Pioppo that was excommunicated specifically for having a Bible in his posession.”
It amazes me that anyone could possibly believe that.
“It turned out to be...”
...completely false in all regards.
The only question is whether you actually believe it, or whether you think that the end justifies the means.
What is completely false and hogwash is the way you assert nonsense and expect us to just accept it.
Your catholic web sites are nothing but lying propaganda blogs. Real life trumps hot air.
>> “Lucifer enjoys eternal life....probably with some excommunicated Catholics” <<
.
Only a catholic could spew such nonsense.
Lucifer will not know eternal life, like almost all catholics, his spirit will suffer eternally without life.
This is an allusion to an Old Testament passage:
When Balaam saw that it pleased the LORD to bless Israel, he did not go as at other times to seek omens but he set his face toward the wilderness. And Balaam lifted up his eyes and saw Israel camping tribe by tribe; and the Spirit of God came upon him. Numbers 24:1-2
How fair are your tents, O Jacob, Your dwellings, O Israel! "Like valleys that stretch out, Like gardens beside the river, Like aloes planted by the LORD, Like cedars beside the waters. "Water will flow from his buckets, And his seed will be by many waters, And his king shall be higher than Agag, And his kingdom shall be exalted. Numbers 24:5-7
Jacob's seed did, indeed, sit by many waters as a result of at least three diasporas: Babylon (Nebuchadnezzar), Greece (Antiochus IV Epiphanes), and Rome (Pompey). Peter even addresses his first epistle to those of these diasporas:
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 1 Peter 1:1
In the Book of Acts, men of Israel are said to have come from all over the known world to hear Peter's first sermon:
Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men from every nation under heaven. Acts 2:5
The facts are set against you.
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.