Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Arthur McGowan

Before the crucifixion was still OT where eating blood was still a sin.

Additionally, the HOLY SPIRIT saw fit to reiterate the command against eating blood in the NT AFTER the day of Pentecost, well into the church age.

No matter how you try to spin it, *Don’t eat blood* means *Don’t eat blood*.

But I don’t expect Catholics to actually OBEY the clear direct commands of Jesus in the matter. They don’t with other issues, but instead rationalize their disobedience away.


245 posted on 01/30/2015 4:03:23 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies ]


To: metmom

According to you, drinking blood was a sin.

Jesus SAID, “Take this and drink; this is the chalice of my blood...”

Fine. Let us suppose that Jesus wasn’t telling the apostles to drink his ACTUAL blood.

That means that Jesus was telling the apostles to do something that SYMBOLIZED drinking his blood. Right?

That would mean Jesus would be okay with committing adultery SYMBOLICALLY, or committing murder SYMBOLICALLY, or worshiping idols SYMBOLICALLY.

Show me an example elsewhere in the gospels where Jesus instructs the apostles to SIN SYMBOLICALLY.


257 posted on 01/30/2015 8:06:32 AM PST by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson