Posted on 01/28/2015 1:23:00 PM PST by RnMomof7
Do you understand the miracle of the sufficiency of the cross?
Catholics still making Jesus a sinner by breaking the law against eating blood.
“It is nothing more than a ploy to get people into bondage...A means to collect cash and property...”
“A means to collect cash and property” is why about 98% of the R.C. fol-de-rol was created in the first place. Same as any other cult.
Of course, Christ died for our sins.
But we are all sinners and fall into sin again and again. What do we do then?
Not any more.....
No, we're not all sinners. Born again believers are saints. We're saints who sometimes sin.
If we sin, we confess it and move on.
God has known our every sin from the moment of our birth until our final breath.. When He hung on that cross He saw all of them...and forgave them and satisfied the wrath of God ,acted as a propitiation for the sin and gave us right standing with God.. ..His cross is totally sufficient ..there is nothing to add to it.
That is the peace that passes all understanding ...He has forgiven us even before we ask ..
The Lord also did not say "this is turned into my body and body," while using this hermeneutic then you much regard statement as "I am the door" as literal, as well as those by others such as David who plainly stated the water was the blood of men.
I am fighting a cold and am not posting much but will supply some of what i have written in the past on this. Which usually centers on Jn 6, and which we see examples of the Lord,
speaking in an apparently physical way in order to reveal the spiritual meaning to those who awaited the meaning, which, as elsewhere, the Lord revealed to true seekers.
In. Jn. 2:19,20, the Lord spoke in a way that seems to refer to destroying the physical temple in which He had just drove out the money changers, and left the Jews to that misapprehension of His words, so that this was a charge during His trial and crucifixion by the carnally minded. (Mk. 14:58; 15:29) But the meaning was revealed to His disciples after the resurrection.
Likewise, in Jn. 3:3, the Lord spoke in such an apparently physical way that Nicodemus exclaimed, "How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?" (John 3:4)
And in which, as is characteristic of John, and as seen in Jn. 6:63, the Lord goes on to distinguish btwn the flesh and the Spirit, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," (John 3:6) leaving Nicodemus to figure it out, requiring seeking, rather than making it clear. Which requires reading more than that chapter, as with Jn. 6, revealing being born spiritually in regeneration. (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9; Eph. 1:13; 2:5)
Likewise in Jn. 4, beside a well of physical water, the Lord spoke to a women seeking such water of a water which would never leave the drinker to thirst again, which again was understood as being physical. But which was subtly inferred to be spiritual to the inquirer who stayed the course, but which is only made clear by reading more of Scriptural revelation.
And thus we see the same manner of revelation in Jn. 6, in which the Lord spoke to souls seeking physical sustenance of a food which would never leave the eater to hunger again. Which again was understood as being physical, but which was subtly inferred to be spiritual to the inquirers who stayed the course. But which is only made clear by reading more of Scriptural revelation.
In so doing the Lord makes living by this "bread" of flesh and blood as analogous to how He lived by the Father, "As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me." (John 6:57)
And the manner by which the Lord lived by the Father was as per Mt. 4:4: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." (Matthew 4:4)
And therefore, once again using metaphor, the Lord stated to disciples who thought He was referring to physical bread, "My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work." (John 4:34)
And likewise the Lord revealed that He would not even be with them physically in the future, but that His words are Spirit and life:
What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. (John 6:62-63)
And as with those who imagined the Lord was referring to the physical Temple, the Lord left the protoCatholics to go their own way, who seemed to have yet imagined that the Lord was sanctioning a form of cannibaalism, or otherwise had no heart for further seeking of the Lord who has "the words of eternal life" as saith Peter, not the flesh, eating of which profits nothing spiritually..
And which is made clear by reading more of Scriptural revelation For the fact is that the allegorical understanding of Jn. 6:27-69 is the only one that is consistent with the rest of Scripture, in which Nowhere in all of Scripture is spiritual and eternal life gained by literally eating anything physical, which eating is what Jn. 6:53,54 makes as an imperative. And as such it must exclude all who deny the physical interpretation of this section of Jn. 6.
For as in John and elsewhere, souls obtain spiritual and eternal life by believing on the Lord Jesus as the Divine Son of God, being born of the Spirit in conversion in believing the gospel message, not by consuming the Lord's Supper. Which is nowhere preached in Acts or elsewhere is the means of regeneration.
And then they live by Christ by desiring the milk (1Pt. 2:2) and then the “strong meat” (Heb. 5:12-14) of the word of God as means of grace, being “nourished” (1Tim. 4:6) by hearing the word of God and letting it dwell in them., (Col. 3:16) Which word (Scriptures) man is to live by, (Mt. 4:4) as again, Christ lived by the Father, (Jn. 6:57) doing His will being His “meat.” (Jn. 4:34)
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24)
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (Acts 10:43-44)
As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby: (1 Peter 2:2)
And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified. (Acts 20:32)
If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. (1 Timothy 4:6)
In contrast, nowhere is the Lord's supper described as being the central means of grace, around which all else revolved, it being “the source and summit of the Christian faith” in which “the work of our redemption is accomplished,” by which one received spiritual life in themselves.
Rather, the Lord's supper in its only manifest description in the life of the church with any detail, is that in which "discerning the body" refers to recognizing each member as part of the body of Christ by showing considerate care for each other by that communal meal which is supposed to "show," declare," "proclaim" the Lord's sacrificial death, rather than to "shame them that have not" by not even waiting for the others but going ahead and filling their faces while others were hungry. As shown and explained more here. .
Moreover, the use of figurative language for eating and drinking is quite prevalent in Scripture, in which men are referred to as bread, and drinking water as being the blood of men, and the word of God is eaten, etc
For David distinctly called water the blood of men, and would not drink it, but poured it out on the ground as an offering to the Lord, as it is forbidden to drink blood. (2 Samuel 23:15-17)
And when God clearly states that the Canaanites were “bread: “Only rebel not ye against the LORD, neither fear ye the people of the land; for they are bread for us” (Num. 14:9)
And or that the Promised Land was “a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof.” (Num. 13:32)
And or when David said that his enemies came to “eat up my flesh.” (Ps. 27:2)
And or when Jeremiah proclaimed, Your words were found. and I ate them. and your word was to me the joy and rejoicing of my heart” (Jer. 15:16)
And or when Ezekiel was told, “eat this scroll, and go, speak to the house of Israel.” (Ezek. 3:1)
And or when (in a phrase similar to the Lord’s supper) John is commanded, “Take the scroll ... Take it and eat it.” (Rev. 10:8-9 )
Furthermore, the use of figurative language for Christ and spiritual things abounds in John, using the physical to refer to the spiritual:
• In John 1:29, Jesus is called “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” — but he does not have hoofs and literal physical wool.
• In John 2:19 Jesus is the temple of God: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” — but He is not made of literal stone.
• In John 3:14,15, Jesus is the likened to the serpent in the wilderness (Num. 21) who must “be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal” (vs. 14, 15) — but He is not made of literal bronze.
• In John 4:14, Jesus provides living water, that “whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life” (v. 14) — but which was not literally consumed by mouth.
• In John 7:37 Jesus is the One who promises “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water” — but this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive. (John 7:38)
• In Jn. 9:5 Jesus is “the Light of the world” — but who is not blocked by an umbrella.
• In John 10, Jesus is “the door of the sheep,”, and the good shepherd [who] giveth his life for the sheep”, “that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly” vs. 7, 10, 11) — but who again, is not literally an animal with cloven hoofs.
• In John 15, Jesus is the true vine — but who does not physically grow from the ground nor whose fruit is literally physically consumed.
As to your last question in the paragraph quoted above: I do not know if this is an "official" teaching of the Church (it's at least not dogmatically defined so I can tell you that). But this general apologetic is from Catholic Answers (just in my own words) if that helps.
That is the problem of relying on CA, whose specious polemics have been refuted time and time again, while if these erroneous interpretation of Scripture are not official ones, then they could be contradicted by other Catholic teaching, as some are. And is contrary to the goal of apologetics, which is to try to convince evangelicals by Scripture to trust in the assured veracity of Rome for determination and assurance of Truth.
Meanwhile, how can you be consistent with your literal interpretation of the unequivocal imperative "verily, verily" statement of Jn. 6:53, that one must believe and consume the Lord's body in order to have spiritual and eternal life, without allowing that those who reject this interpretation cannot?
Does that mean that you can commit adultery, murder, lie, steal, etc. and still be saved?
What a falsehood that is!
[17] Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse.
[18] For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
[19] For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
[20] When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.
[21] For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.
[22] What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.
[23] For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
[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.
[27] Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
[28] But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
[29] For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
[30] For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
[31] For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
[32] But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
[33] Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.
[34] And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.
So we see that Paul was chasticing them for turning a gathering of the bretherin into a drunken party, and for not recognizing that Yeshua's body was broken for their healing.
. So much for pagan sun god cookies replacing the bread and wine of the Melek Zedek!
.
We all adultery, murder, lie, steal, etc.. Every single one of us does it in our hearts.
Jesus equated lust with actual adultery and hate with murder.
And yes, redeemed children of God do fall into sin. We give in to temptation in moments of weakness. But that doesn't mean we aren't saved.
Peter in 2 Peter, calls Lot *righteous Lot*.
Now, I'm not sure if you are familiar with Lot's behavior in the OT, but it is hardly something that I would consider a righteous lifestyle, and yet the Holy Spirit called him *righteous*.
Not only that, but your standards would exclude form salvation the likes of Moses, King David, and the apostle Paul.
What a falsehood that is!
On the contrary, THAT is GRACE.
And thanks again for displaying the fact that Catholics believe in a works based salvation. What a falsehood that is!
Clearly Jesus used allegory and symbolism to make his point clear while teaching.
But Christ was giving instructions at the Last Supper.
At the Last Supper, He held the Eucharist in His hands and said “This IS my body”, “This IS my blood”. Then He gave explicit instructions “Do this in memory of Me”.
I am able to make the distinction between teaching and instructions. Jesus gave several other instructions; they too were missing symbolism:
“Love one another, as I have loved you.” (John 13:34).
“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19)
If you’re going to give instructions on how to do something or how to perform specific actions, it is best to be as literal as possible.
If you mean, Did they eat bleeding, gory flesh, tearing into his muscles and shedding his blood on the floor? the answer is No.
Jesus said, holding a piece of bread in his hands, “This is my body.” Similarly with the chalice of wine, which he said, “This is the chalice of my blood.”
The flesh and blood Jesus gave them in the sacrament was the same flesh and blood physically present to their eyes, ears, and touch. It was given to them in such a manner that they could obey his command to eat and drink in a non-bloody, non-horrific way.
Since this was done at the Passover, where eating the lamb was essential to the ritual under the Old Covenant, and since Jesus was the Lamb about to be sacrificed (He carried his cross at the same hour as the lambs were being slaughtered all over Jerusalem.) it makes perfect sense that eating the Lamb would be an essential part of the ritual in the New Covenant. St. John in particular emphasizes that Jesus is replacing the old Passover with a new Passover, the old lamb with the Lamb of God (himself), the old sacrament with a new sacrament.
The Old Covenant existed precisely to prefigure and prepare the Jewish mind for the New Covenant.
Exactly! And it is a shame that some don't seem to understand this. We live in a broken world and are broken ourselves. It is our failings that we need to confess to the Father/Son/Holy Spirit so that we can turn and be healed.
Today some would simply like to ignore sin and just talk about the love of God when the power is in confessing our sin.
“I am”
You bring up an interesting point. Is it really so important what happens in the Eucharist as what the intended purpose of the Eucharist is? It doesn't confer grace. It helps us to remember that this practice comes directly from the Lord and for Him we remember.
IOW, it's a SYMBOL.
The Methodist Church says about Communion “something happens”.
You have to love it. My daughter takes the Communion bread home so she and her roommates can eat it. One of them is Catholic.
Kinda weird.
Clarification: leftover Communion bread.
We feed our leftover bread to the birds.
But the blood of the Passover Lamb was NEVER consumed.
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.