Pope Francis: Church Must Learn to Abandon Old ‘Traditions’

Allow me to share some wisdom from a fellow freeper from a couple of years ago, since you appear very metaphor challenged, by design of your religion of cztholiciism:

If there had been Protestants in the crowd that day (John chapter six), they would not likely ask 'how' as if it were a physics question. The physics approach would be more natural to those who had no experience with a mracle like that which Jesus had just performed, the feeding of the five thousand from the fishes and loaves. Now Jesus says He is the bread from Heaven and you have to eat His flesh and drink his blood and if you are stuck on physics you want to know the mechanism.
But Protestants are well versed with metaphor. Jesus Himself is largely responsible for that. You know the drill. "I am the vine, the good shepherd, the light of the world, the way (path), the door (gate)." So a Protestant hearing Jesus' words would not ask a physics question like 'how.' All the normal language triggers are there to red-flag metaphor, so the Protestant would ask 'What is He teaching? Where is the anaolgy that helps us understand what He is saying?"
And that analogy is given, in verse John 6:35:
And Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst. (John 6:35)
The header, the main metaphor, "I am the bread of life." Analogy #1: Coming to Jesus will satisfy your hunger. Analogy #2: Believing in Jesus will satisfy your thirst.
These are very helpful analogies. They are saying the same thing. Coming to Jesus is believing in Jesus is having faith in Jesus, the core message of the Gospel. There is no physics question here.
Do we accept that a person who believes in Jesus will never again get hungry at dinner time? No? Why not? Shouldn't we be consistently literal? By what authority may we disregard the normal signals of metaphor to begin with a literal premise and then switch to metaphor when convenient?
Lets do it again. Does a person who believes in Jesus continue to have physical thirst? We are sure everyone here will Amen that, Catholic and Protestant alike. So obviously, Jesus is NOT refering to satisfying physical thirst. Still, literally He is speaking of thirst, agreed? It is a lesser metaphor used to explain the greater metaphor, Jesus as the Bread of Life. Of course "bread" here is not even literal bread. It is a generic term for the sustenance of life. Literal bread cannot satisfy thirst. So even at that level is it metaphor.
Which is fine, as every informed Protestant knows, because there's nothing the least bit suspicious or unspiritual about seeing metaphor where there really is metaphor. Indeed, for us, given our training and upbringing (I have always been a Baptist), it would seem dishonest to blow past all those clear indicators of metaphor and try to reduce what Jesus is saying to a test of faith over the physics of 'how.' No, for us it will always come back to the core question, Where is your faith centered? In the things you can do to earn your keep with God? Or in who Jesus is and what He has done for you?
Peace,
746 posted on ‎1‎/‎16‎/‎2017‎ ‎9‎:‎41‎:‎35‎ ‎AM by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)

Jesus exhorted the Jews, who desired a repetition of the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves:

"Labor not for the meat which perishes but for that which endures unto life everlasting which the Son of Man will give you" (27).

In the ensuing Eucharistic speech, Jesus:

a) Speaks first quite generally of the true heavenly bread which descends from heaven and confers eternal life on the world (29—34);

b) Then designates Himself as this life‑giving heavenly bread, and for its possession demands faith (35–51a);

c) and finally more closely determines the true heavenly bread as His flesh and makes the eating of His flesh and the drinking of His blood necessary for the possession of eternal life (51b—58).

The, opponents of the Real Presence understand these words in the metaphorical sense of belief in the sacrificial death of Christ on the Cross. However, the necessity of accepting a literal interpretation in this case is evident:

a) From the nature of the words used. (v. 56) “true, real meat,” “true, real drink”' "Caro enim mea vere est cibus: et sanguis meus, vere est potus:” The obvious meaning is the literal one.

b) From the difficulties created by the figurative interpretation. In biblical language, that is, among the Orientals, to eat a person's flesh and drink his blood in the metaphorical sense means to persecute him in a bloody fashion, to destroy him, to calumniate him.

Psalm 26, 1b‑2: "The Lord is the protector of my life: of whom shall I be afraid? Whilst the wicked draw near against me, to eat my flesh."

Isaias 9, 20: "And he shall turn to the right hand, and shall be hungry: and shall eat on the left hand, and shall not be filled: and everyone shall eat the flesh of his own arm: Manasses Ephraim, and Ephraim Manasses, and they together shall be against Juda" 

Isaias 49, 26: "And I will feed thy enemies with their own flesh: and they shall be made drunk with their own blood as with new wine;..." 

c) From the connection between the first part and the second part of the discourse: just as Christ came to us really through the Incarnation (v. 38f), so He really comes to us in His own person through the Eucharist (v. 50f).

d) From the auditors' manner of understanding: they heard these words in the literal meaning; and from Christ's manner of acting: Rather than correct this interpretation of His words, He approved of it.

Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths – Dave Armstrong

Here's some wisdom for you:

There are four narrations of the institution of the Eucharist:  Keep in mind that Paul was not one of the original Apostles and wrote his letter to the Corinthians about eight years after the Gospel of Mathew was written.

- Matt. 26:26‑28- Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a chalice, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”

- Mark 14:22‑24- And as they were eating, he took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” And he took a chalice, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them. “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.”

 - Luke 22: 19-20- And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the chalice after supper, saying, “This chalice which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.”

 - I Corinthians 11: 23‑25- For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also the chalice, after supper, saying, “This chalice is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the chalice, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

Paul continues, after recapitulating the Last Supper, with words of strong admonition regarding our understanding of the significance of what we are doing by participating in the Eucharist:

1 Corinthians 11: 26‑30- For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come. 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. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

This is also intended quite literally. For how can one be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord by engaging in merely a symbolic act. Whatever Christ promised; that He faithfully gave. Clearly in the literal sense these words demonstrate the Real Presence. Taken in their proper and literal sense, the words are so clear, that no clearer words can be found for explaining the Catholic dogma; simultaneously, the metaphorical sense is obscure. Therefore, the literal sense must be preferred.

See also my post #143

IF you knew the Risen Lord Jesus you would be able to understand the passages you posted, but understand them spiritually instead of only carnally. Your chosen religion of catholicism feeds you only the continuously victimized Jesus on the cross. But He Is Risen and constructing a Body of Christ soon to be departing planet Earth.

Can you, for instance, tell us the meaning of The Body of Christ, discerning the human flesh and blood curses from Genesis and Leviticus as real even into the first Ekklesia Council of the Apostles as related in Acts 15? The distinction between the spiritual Body and the physical Body escapes the carnal mind, just as you have illustrated for us. So, no, you haven't offered to us wisdom, only confusion and defense of a pagan inveigling into Christianity via the Rome Catholic cult. You have quoted the Word of God but without wisdom just an org spin meant to substantiate the false use of the Remembrance Jesus established BEFORE He sealed the New Covenant with His blood at the Cross.... No soup for you!

You might be on milk, if you're not starving ... The Risen Lord, following His Sacrifice on that Roman cross for our Salvation, is now our Great High Priest, in Heaven, at The Father's Right Hand, not a bloody Catholicism victim being lead around by catholic priests at Mass. When two or more are gathered in His Name there is He in their midst, really, not as a bloody 'victim' but as the Priest, our Priest forever. But that is meat and those stuck in milk have a very difficult time comprehending that, by satan's design.

If you were ready for meat, we could discuss how He might really in the midst but not visible, just like the being who wrote upon the wall of Palace Party Central in Babylon (Dan 5). But alas, you are not ready for strong meat.

You seem blind to the reality that Christ was crucified for our sins.

Actually, considering how Catholics like to work for their salvation, they are the ones who seem blind to it.

Everything they add to the substitutionary death of Christ on the cross negates the work He did there.

Galatians 2:15-21 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor. For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.

Taken in their proper and literal sense, the words are so clear, that no clearer words can be found for explaining the Catholic dogma; simultaneously, the metaphorical sense is obscure. Therefore, the literal sense must be preferred.

DO THIS IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME.

Pretty clear what the Lord's Supper, not the Eucharist, is all about.

It is not a means of salvation, but a result of salvation.

So Larry, you believe John 6 to be understood literally when He said to unbelieving Jews to eat/drink His flesh and blood.

Do you get hungry or thirsty?

Should be a simple yes or no answer.

After reporting the institution of the Eucharist, St. Paul adds:

"Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord... not discerning the body of the Lord" (1 Corinthians 11, 27‑29).

If Christ is only metaphorically present in the Eucharist, communicating unworthily offends indeed His person but not His body and blood.

This is confirmed by what the Apostle said earlier: "The chalice of benediction... is it not the communication of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?" (1 Cor 10:16).

We cannot communicate in the body and in the blood of Christ in the Eucharist unless they are really there.

Even you are not ignorant enough to fail to recognize that the hunger and thirst Christ is speaking for refer to our life with Him in Heaven.

After reporting the institution of the Eucharist, St. Paul adds: "Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord... not discerning the body of the Lord" (1 Corinthians 11, 27‑29).

If Christ is only metaphorically present in the Eucharist, communicating unworthily offends indeed His person but not His body and blood.

We cannot communicate in the body and in the blood of Christ in the Eucharist unless they are really there.

The bigger point though, is that Christ is ALWAYS with us. He doesn't just show up at the Lord's Supper. It certainly seems Roman Catholics don't feel this way. Though I would venture they "feel" closer to Mary on a daily basis than perhaps Christ...unless they go to the "Mass".

Matthew 28:20 "Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

Hebrews 13:5 "Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have, for he has said, 'I will never leave you nor forsake you.'"

Romans 8:38-39 "For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord."

We've been given the Holy Spirt of Promise who is always praying for us, searching our hearts and minds, to get our prayers right.

The point is, for the Christian, we are always with Jesus and He is always with us.

Perhaps the Roman Catholic will one day be able to say this.

Are you still so dull that you need a bottle to feed you the milk? If Jesus is there in our midst it is as our High Priest! You and your false religion have not met the Risen Christ! You want to perform a pagan ritual to get the false jesus into your alimentary tract supposing you gain eternal life thereby.

Do you even realize how Great if Our High Priest? You are insulting the Body of Christ! Do you even know the Body of Christ? It is not a bloody snack, it is the total of ALL BELIEVERS since Pentecost who ALL have been born from above and have the Holy Spirit Seal upon their souls, awaiting the great departure which will leave you false religionists grumbling about all the works you Catholics have done to merit what ONLY GOD can convey by His Grace not your merit because of the Cross AND SUBSEQUENT ASCENSION into Heaven as our Risen from death now Great High Priest!

faux cannibalism is an offense, a spiritual offense. God is not mocked and the Catholic Mass ritual of pagan eating the flesh of whom you claim is Jesus is mocking at God as your father satan directs in your blindness.

Am I angry? You betcha ... I hate satan and all he accomplishes through fake 'other religions'. The death of souls without The Grace of God is enough to make me furious because the perishing are so easily duped into embracing their demise when the TRUTH of the Gosepl of Grace (not imaginary cannibalism) is so openly shared and rejected for the pride of doing to merit.

Do I hate Catholics or you, G Larry? Not even. I would not venture into these ridiculous threads and be ridiculed by posts and in freepmails if I did not consider your immortal soul more important than my bumps and nruises. Besides, I have been commanded to contend for the faith, and fake cannibalism rituals are not the faith once delivered, because the jesus imagined in the Mass is not the Great High Priest, so He is not in your midst when you spuriously eat flesh and blood of an imaginary victim. The Body Jesus occupies IN HEAVEN is a Risen Man-God whom you will sooner or later meet. May it be sooner and before the great departure.

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.