Bread of life discourse as metaphor

[guanophore]

Talking points.

None for a person who is not really here to have dialogue, no.

 

[pablope]

I fear that waste may all we have in store, Tiberius. Our impudent little sister apparently is not here to get Catholic answers, and seems to delight in attempting to yank our chain. I suggest we pray for her.

Dear Lord, bring deliverance from impudence, and create a heart that is meek and ready to receive your instruction. May she receive the implanted word that is able to save souls, in Jesus’ name, Amen.

Marian Prayer for Humility
Dear Mary, model of humility and our loving Mother,
pray for WCH at the throne of our loving Father.
Ask that WCH be granted the threefold gift
of true humility;
knowledge of her sinfulness,
trust in God’s mercy,
and respect of our neighbor.
To God be glory, honor and praise, forever.
Amen

 

[WCH]

I fear that waste may all we have in store, Tiberius. Our impudent little sister apparently is not here to get Catholic answers, and seems to delight in attempting to yank our chain. I suggest we pray for her.

I’m praying for you ladies as well, and for your husbands, or boyfriends, as the case may be.

 

[NHInsider]

Wow, stay away for a couple of days and the whole discussion goes flying off into the hinterlands . . .

WCH, back in post #40 you asked me why I thought 1 Cor. 11:27-29 was “explicit.” I am interested to know, since you reject the notion that Paul believed in the Real Presence, what you think he meant by warning against receiving “unworthily” and “without discerning the Body”?

You also asked

Why shouldn’t Justin tell the truth?

I did not, of course, suggest that Justin Martyr did not tell the truth. I remarked that even if Justin had considered John’s Gospel Scripture, he would have been unlikely to quote it in a letter to a non-believer intended to settle the pagan’s mind about Christian rituals.

Jesus, after all, doubles down on the “I am the bread - eat this bread” comments φάγῃ ἐκ τούτου τοῦ ἄρτου in 6:51 by rephrasing it as “munches on my flesh” ὁ τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα in verse 54.

 

[Tiberius1701]

Wow, stay away for a couple of days and the whole discussion goes flying off into the hinterlands . . .

WCH, back in post #40 you asked me why I thought 1 Cor. 11:27-29 was “explicit.” I am interested to know, since you reject the notion that Paul believed in the Real Presence, what you think he meant by warning against receiving “unworthily” and “without discerning the Body”?

You also asked

I did not, of course, suggest that Justin Martyr did not tell the truth. I remarked that even if Justin had considered John’s Gospel Scripture, he would have been unlikely to quote it in a letter to a non-believer intended to settle the pagan’s mind about Christian rituals.

Jesus, after all, doubles down on the “I am the bread - eat this bread” comments φάγῃ ἐκ τούτου τοῦ ἄρτου in 6:51 by rephrasing it as “munches on my flesh” ὁ τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα in verse 54.

I sincerely doubt that WCH will answer your question about Paul’s meaning in I Cor. And I said the same thing about Justin Martyr’s purpose, but WCH simply rejected it out of hand in the same way that he or she rejects the logical fact that Paul couldn’t have referred to John 6 despite it not being written till about 30-40 years after Paul’s death.

 

[The_Fly]

Another thing how are we not breaking OT laws when we drink his blood?

Thanks for any help.

Your not breaking the OT laws when drinking Christ blood beacuse its supernaturally present in the form of wine and not the natural form of blood. Charging Catholis with cannibalism is a.) a complete misunderstanding of what cannibalism is and b.) a misunderstanding of the Eucharist. The only time you could charge Catholics with cannibalism is if they ate Christ’s Body and Blood under its natural form e.g, human tissue, etc. Everytime there has been a Eucharistic miracle in the Catholic Church where the host turns into the natural form of Christ Flesh and Blood no one eats it.

The only thing you can charge Catholics with is consuming a vaild and Perfect Pasch Sacrifice.

 

[The_Fly]

Another thing how are we not breaking OT laws when we drink his blood?

Thanks for any help.

Sorry i think my above post missed the question you were asking. I’m so used to hearing people charge Catholics with cannibalism so when I hear the above I thought thats what you were refering to.

The OT law was that you cannot offer the blood with bread containing yeast in it.

"Thou shalt not sacrifice the blood of my victim upon leaven, neither shall the fat of my solemnity remain until the morning."–Exodus 23:18

**“Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice upon leaven: neither shall there remain in the morning any thing of the victim of the solemnity of the Lord.”–Exodus 34:25 **

The bread used for the Eucharist is unleavened bread which contains no yest in it. Becuase of this Catholics have not violated anything regarding the OT law by partaking of Christ blood. I hope this helped.

"But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it."–Genesis

Therefore I have said to the children of Israel: No soul of you, nor of the strangers that sojourn among you, shall eat blood.–Leviticus 17:12

Most also use this as “evidence” against the Realy Presence but as I stated above it does not hold weight. God is telling them not to eat blood in its natural form or when it is contained in the flesh meat in its natural form. The Eucharist is the Body under the form of bread and the Blood under the form of wine, so while Chirst’s Body and Blood are present in a supernatural way it does not break the laws given in the OT regarding the consumption of blood. If the Body and Blood of Christ were present in their natural form the Catholics would not eat it and they dont eat it when this happens during Eucharistic Miracles where the bread and wine change into the natural form of meat/flesh and blood.

 

[WCH]

WCH, back in post #40 you asked me why I thought 1 Cor. 11:27-29 was “explicit.”

I’m still awaiting your answer.

 

[guanophore]

I sincerely doubt that WCH will answer your question about Paul’s meaning in I Cor. And I said the same thing about Justin Martyr’s purpose, but WCH simply rejected it out of hand in the same way that he or she rejects the logical fact that Paul couldn’t have referred to John 6 despite it not being written till about 30-40 years after Paul’s death.

I would like to know how you can profane that which is not present.

 

[zz912]

Do Protestants in this thread believe they participate in Christ’s death on the cross and resurrection? And do they believe Christ’s death and resurrection apply to them and their sins today?

 

[Anna_Scott]

The apostles, in their recollections, which are called gospels, handed down to us what Jesus commanded them to do. They tell us that he took bread, gave thanks and said: Do this in memory of me. This is my body. In the same way he took the cup, he gave thanks and said: This is my blood. The Lord gave this command to them alone. Ever since then we have constantly reminded one another of these things. The rich among us help the poor and we are always united. For all that we receive we praise the Creator of the universe through his Son Jesus Christ and through the Holy Spirit.It’s interesting that like Paul, Justin doesn’t refer to John 6 at all, and Paul’s account is directly from Jesus, who also doesn’t refer Paul to the account of John 6.

WCH,
Are you claiming John Chapter 6 is less reliable than the writings of Paul? Please clarify.

Thanks,
Anna

 

[guanophore]

WCH,
Are you claiming John Chapter 6 is less reliable than the writings of Paul? Please clarify.

Thanks,
Anna

It is really quite strange. She expects Paul to refer to a book that will not be written for many decades after his death.

 

[WCH]

WCH,
Are you claiming John Chapter 6 is less reliable than the writings of Paul? Please clarify.

Thanks,
Anna

No, I’m saying that neither Paul nor Justin make reference to John 6 in regard to the Eucharist.

 

[WCH]

It is really quite strange. She expects Paul to refer to a book that will not be written for many decades after his death.

You’ve been corrected on this guanophore. Why do you continue to sin willfully? Is it the “Roman Catholic” way of doing things? Sinning willfully?

 

[zz912]

No, I’m saying that neither Paul nor Justin make reference to John 6 in regard to the Eucharist.

HOW could Paul make a reference to John’s Gospel when he died several years or decades before it was written? Could you PLEASE explain how this would be possible???

And of course Justin wouldn’t make reference to John when he was writing to non-Christians. who wouldn’t give the Gospel any weight. Would a reference by me of Pope Benedict XVI hold any weight with you?

 

[guanophore]

No, I’m saying that neither Paul nor Justin make reference to John 6 in regard to the Eucharist.

But you have not explained how you expect Paul to refer to a book that has not yet been written.

 

[guanophore]

You’ve been corrected on this guanophore. Why do you continue to sin willfully? Is it the “Roman Catholic” way of doing things? Sinning willfully?

The fact that you say you are a 'guy" does not make it so. You can be a girl just role playing as a guy, for all I know.

You said you were Catholic, too, but you know very little about the Catholic faith. There are plenty of people that role play on here.

A willful sin requires that a person know that what they are doing is wrong. You have not offered any convincing evidence to that effect. Especially given your method of reasoning, which is shallow, and emotionally based. Why should I give more credence to what you claim over what you have demonstrated? Your actions are speaking louder than your words!

 

[WCH]

The fact that you say you are a 'guy" does not make it so. You can be a girl just role playing as a guy, for all I know.

You’ve been corrected, guanophore, and you persist in your sin after that correction; therefore, I conclude that willful sinning is part of the makeup of certain Catholics; Forum Masters, no less.

You said you were Catholic, too, but you know very little about the Catholic faith. There are plenty of people that role play on here.

I am a former Catholic guanophore. I have no reason to lie, but because of my pressing you about your “apologetic,” and your inability to support your assertions, you have every reason to try and make me out to be liar, isn’t that right?

A willful sin requires that a person know that what they are doing is wrong. You have not offered any convincing evidence to that effect. Especially given your method of reasoning, which is shallow, and emotionally based. Why should I give more credence to what you claim over what you have demonstrated? Your actions are speaking louder than your words!

Sounds like you’re trying to convince yourself that you’ve done and are doing no wrong, guanophore. Obviously your conscience is unsettled over this, and it should be because I’ve been, and am being forthright and honest with you, and you are definitely unable to deal with that.

 

[guanophore]

I am a former Catholic guanophore. I have no reason to lie,

Perhaps you were baptized Catholic.

Perhaps you have reason to role play. Lots of folks do that on the internet.

Clearly you were poorly catechized, which was the point.

but because of my pressing you about your “apologetic,” and your inability to support your assertions, you have every reason to try and make me out to be liar, isn’t that right?

No one has accused you of lying, WCH. You are creating yet another strawman.

In fact, have offered no “apologetic”, because you are unwilling, or unable to engage in a meaningful discussion about matters of faith on CAF.

You have asked me to support things I have not asserted, and doctrine that I do not espouse.

Sounds like you're trying to convince yourself that you've done and are doing no wrong, guanophore.

Is that right?

I noticed another poster informed you about how projection functions. I can see why the point was being made now.

Obviously your conscience is unsettled over this, and it should be because I’ve been, and am being forthright and honest with you, and you are definitely unable to deal with that.

LOL. :clapping:

Thanks, I needed a good chortle!

Unsettled over what?!

You have yet to say anything of any substance whatsoever.

 

[Anna_Scott]

No, I’m saying that neither Paul nor Justin make reference to John 6 in regard to the Eucharist.

WCH,
I appreciate the clarification. So, why is this important?

Anna