Catholic Apologists and the Greek Word Trogo (“Eat my flesh” John 6)

[juliamajor]

We eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood (Jn. 6:53) when we come to him and believe on him.

==> Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will
never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. (John
6:35)

God bless you.

You need to read the entire chapter 6 of John to really get it.taking lines out of context
And cherry picking will never get you to understand the fullness of what is happening and ho wmany levels of meaning you can glean from it.

 

[juliamajor]

When I read the Bible in context in the fisrt time I knew Jesus was speaking figuratelvy, and there are million upon millions just like me . it is just like me neighbor tells me " I am a lion , inmediatly I konw he is speking figuratelvly telling me he was very brave, I dont understand you.

Might be millions who believe , but we got billions.

 

[Marcos100]

Really. Have you expanded your mind? Do you use different commentaries? Do you up have proper diverse library? Do you listen to those with different views and deconstruct it? Whose universal rules of interpretation? Don’t they change age to age or at least how we view them?

Yes I have resources. Hmmmm

 

[juliamajor]

We eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood (Jn. 6:53) when we come to him and believe on him.

==> Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will
never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. (John
6:35)

God bless you.

You have only one level of meaning as interpretation! How sad ! You have a mentality that is either/ or. Our looking at scripture is linked to our spiritual ancestors, the Jewish people. Not either / or but both/ and.
A horse is a horse of course but not every horse is just a horse. Kings of Israel rode on donkeys Horse is for someone with money. So arrogance is a meaning. Horses couldn’t be afforded by majority of people but the military could. Horse as symbol of war.
The list can go on and on. scripture has layers of meaning, if only one meaning did apply biblical school would be months not years long.

 

[juliamajor]

Jesus said He was the light of the world . Does that mean He was composed of fire?/QUOTE.
Let’s see.Hebrews says our God is a consuming fire! That little verse can give you tons of meaning.
is God the consuming fire seen in the wandering in exodus or destruction of Korah only?
Our is he a consuming fire because he wants us to give Him everything.be an oblation?

 

[juliamajor]

Yes I have resources. Hmmmm

Hmmm doesn’t fill me with confidence about your resources

 

[juliamajor]

We eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood (Jn. 6:53) when we come to him and believe on him.

==> Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will
never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. (John
6:35)

God bless you.

And? Your point?

 

[juliamajor]

in the Last supper it is obvious that the bread and wine were a symbol of himself

Symbol? How can you drink the cup unworthly if it’s just a symbol.?

 

[juliamajor]

We eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood (Jn. 6:53) when we come to him and believe on him.

==> Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will
never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. (John
6:35)

God bless you.

Again so much going on here and so many layers of meaning.

 

[juliamajor]

in the Last supper it is obvious that the bread and wine were a symbol of himself

Don’t be so simplistic! There is rich and riches slipping through your fingers because you refuse to look deeper.

 

[juliamajor]

in the Last supper it is obvious that the bread and wine were a symbol of himself

Dig deeper man, untold riches ,and richness are staring in your face.

 

[juliamajor]

the lords supper has notbing to do with John 6. No river of living water nor “eat every word that comes out of the mouth of God.” Thouse they are very similar. In Jhon 6 Jesus even mentions wine, and he was talking about gi ing his body (flesh) on the cross for the whole world.

Sorry that reply makes no sense at all.maybe you can clarify?

 

[juliamajor]

sorry man but Jesus is saying beleive in him is eating him somthing people were doing already

People were eating Jesus already?in the beginning of chapter 6 Jesus feeds the people mere bread and the get super excited and really seem to love him because of matter he gives them.Rather a simple parlour trick for the Lord of Creation, don’t you think?what’s really going on here?

 

[juliamajor]

the lords supper has notbing to do with John 6. No river of living water nor “eat every word that comes out of the mouth of God.” Thouse they are very similar. In Jhon 6 Jesus even mentions wine, and he was talking about gi ing his body (flesh) on the cross for the wihole world.

If the flesh is useless why did Jesus get crucified? If the flesh is of no avail than there is no such thing as redemptive suffering and we are not saved and never will be.

 

[juliamajor]

When I read the Bible in context in the fisrt time I knew Jesus was speaking figuratelvy, and there are million upon millions just like me . it is just like me neighbor tells me " I am a lion , inmediatly I konw he is speking figuratelvly telling me he was very brave, I dont understand you.

Then you have not understood what you’ve read if you only see the word on one level.

 

[slh3016]

Ok, Marcos, I want to ask you a question. I got this from Stephen Ray’s Crossing the Tiber so it’s not entirely original

Have you ever heard of Pascal’s Wager? If not, basically, Pascal says that one must wager regarding the existence of God. There’s no middle ground. You must choose whether you believe God exists or He doesn’t. If you wager that indeed God exists and live your life according to His mandates, and, He really does not exist, what have you lost in the end? Nothing. But, the opposite of that is true as well. If you wager that He doesn’t exist but He really does, you gain nothing and lose everything!

The same is true for the Eucharist: “If you wager that Eucharist is the Body of Christ, you have everything to gain and nothing to lose. On the other hand, if you wager that the Eucharist is nothing but a mere symbol, when in fact it is the gracious gift of God-the Body and Blood of his Son, ‘the medicine of immortality to the soul’-you have nothing to gain and everything, including possibly your soul, to lose.” p. 270-271

So, you see, Marcos, you are wagering. You are wagering against Jesus’s literal words, against the testimony of the early church practices, against the writings of the early church fathers, against the unanimous church practice for the first 1500 years, against the continued practice among the over 1 billion Catholics worldwide, against all Eastern Orthodox worldwide, and against even some Protestants (while they may not hold to transubstantiation, they hold to some form of a Real Presence in communion). Based upon what? Your own fallible interpretation?!?! That’s a very steep wager, don’t you think? What if, Marcos, you are wrong? What will you say when you stand in front of Jesus and have to explain how so many people tried to show the error in your thinking, but you obstinately refused? It’s a sobering thought for all of us and one I had to contemplate myself. I decided that I’d rather go with the evidence and take my chances with that. I don’t want to explain to Jesus why I denied receiving the most precious gift He ever gave us - His life: body, blood, and divinity. I cannot wait to be able to enter the Catholic Church and receive this most precious gift, the medicine my soul desperately needs. Not the bread, not the wine, but Jesus literally. I don’t believe one can have any more of a personal relationship with Jesus than the Eucharist. That’s my wager.

As others have duly noted, what you claim to be obvious to anyone who reads their Bible, is not obvious in the same interpretation as yours. So who is right? Where do you go to resolve it? You still haven’t answered that question.

 

[fasolislithuan]

I only take into account a historic writing when it matches with what the bible says other wise i reject it INMEDIATLY

Ok. But in this cases, when you believe the Bible says x and other people believe the Bible says y, who has the correct interpretation? How do you know you have the correct interpretation and the rest are wrong? Billions of people believe their interpretation is inspired by the Holy Spirit and they have exactly a different belief to yours. So what is the correct method to discern which is the truth? Can you explain us what is the correct formula?

Pd: We are not hungry piranhas . We respect you, but we want you clarify us your position.

 

[Robyn_p]

I was trying to answer your question , but you dont answer my, that is not fair .

Who are you addressing this to? I’m sorry if I missed one of your questions, can you repeat it? I’ve tried to answer all the ones I’ve seen, but a lots been happening lately and I might have missed one. Sorry about that.

In order to understand the Jews you have to put on their sandals you have ** to try see thrgouh their eyes**, now having that in mind:In 6:33, He says that the bread of heaven is not His earthly flesh but He Who [personally and now incarnately] came down to give life to the world. When in 6:34, the believers said to Him Lord, give us this bread evermore!'- Jesus did not pick up a piece of earthly bread and turn it into Himself. Instead, in 6:35, He said to them I am the bread of life’ [and not I will become the bread of life']; he who comes to Me [and not he who comes to a piece of earthly bread that I will turn into Myself] shall never be hue."

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

Marcos, this verse completely contradicts what you say here. You said Jesus did not say the bread from heaven is his flesh, and yet in verse 51 he says exactly that. I don’t see any way around this.

Again, if all Jesus wanted to teach was that we needed to have faith in him and nothing else, he would have stopped at verse 35. (where you stop) He had made his point. The Jews weren’t confused about that. What they didn’t like was that he said he came down from heaven, since they knew his parents. It’s only when he says the bread they must eat IS His flesh that they start objecting again. But there was no need for him to say this.

So the question is once again, what purpose did he have for saying what he does in verse 51 and following? I still haven’t seen an answer from you about that.

And by the way, sorry if we seem like piranhas here. We’re not trying to be, really. I do appreciate that you have for the most part replied to all of us. That takes a lot of perseverance. I hope I don’t come across as harsh or mean in my replies, it’s hard over text to convey what my emotion is. I really have enjoyed our back and forth though. It’s been fun.

 

[Marcos100]

Who are you addressing this to? I’m sorry if I missed one of your questions, can you repeat it? I’ve tried to answer all the ones I’ve seen, but a lots been happening lately and I might have missed one. Sorry about that.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

Marcos, this verse completely contradicts what you say here. You said Jesus did not say the bread from heaven is his flesh, and yet in verse 51 he says exactly that. I don’t see any way around this.

Again, if all Jesus wanted to teach was that we needed to have faith in him and nothing else, he would have stopped at verse 35. (where you stop) He had made his point. The Jews weren’t confused about that. What they didn’t like was that he said he came down from heaven, since they knew his parents. It’s only when he says the bread they must eat IS His flesh that they start objecting again. But there was no need for him to say this.

So the question is once again, what purpose did he have for saying what he does in verse 51 and following? I still haven’t seen an answer from you about that.

And by the way, sorry if we seem like piranhas here. We’re not trying to be, really. I do appreciate that you have for the most part replied to all of us. That takes a lot of perseverance. I hope I don’t come across as harsh or mean in my replies, it’s hard over text to convey what my emotion is. I really have enjoyed our back and forth though. It’s been fun.

Yeah I made a mistake in that point , verse 51, I am humbly enough to correct it. but i will wirte more in a momet

The Jews asked for (what they thoughot was ) physical bread, demonstrating that they did not understand that Jesus was giving them an earthly metaphor for a spiritual truth. Jesus’ response was to define the metaphor, his opening remarks were:

Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. (John 6:35).

We eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood (Jn. 6:53) when we come to him and
believe on him.

Jesus did not pick up a piece of earthly bread and turn it into Himself. Instead, in 6:35, He said to them I am the bread of life' [and not I will become the bread of life’]; he who comes to Me [and not `he who comes to a piece of earthly bread that I will turn into Myself] shall never be hue." There is no literal eating at all.

Jesus responds telling them that only a person who beleives that Jesus is the Son of God will be saved, and that he is indeed the “bread of life”. He reapeated several times that eternal life comes through beleiving. As someone said it “How many times does Jesus need to say it?”

With just the host it wont satisfied your physical hunger not will sustain you with physical life, even taken daily. So what it means “food indeed” if it doesnt neet the characteristics of physical food?

The Jews asked for (what they thoughot was ) physical bread, demonstrating that they did not understand that Jesus was giving them an earthly metaphor for a spiritual truth. Jesus’ response was to define the metaphor, his opening remarks were:

Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. (John 6:35).

We eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood (Jn. 6:35) when we come to him and believe on him. Clearly it is NOT a reference about physical eating.

Jesus did not pick up a piece of earthly bread and turn it into Himself. Instead, in 6:35, He said to them I am the bread of life' [and not I will become the bread of life’]; he who comes to Me [and not `he who comes to a piece of earthly bread that I will turn into Myself] shall never be hue." There is no literal eating at all.

Jesus responds telling them that only a person who beleives that Jesus is the Son of God will be saved, and that he is indeed the “bread of life”. He reapeated several times that eternal life comes through beleiving. As someone said it “How many times does Jesus need to say it?”

With just the host it wont satisfied your physical hunger nor will sustain you with physical life, even taken daily. So what it means “food indeed” if it doesnt neet the characteristics of physical food?

 

[juliamajor]

Marcos100:

The Jews asked for (what they thoughot was ) physical bread, demonstrating that they did not understand that Jesus was giving them an earthly metaphor for a spiritual truth. Jesus’ response was to define the metaphor, his opening remarks were:

Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. (John 6:35).

We eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood (Jn. 6:35) when we come to him and believe on him.

Jesus did not pick up a piece of earthly bread and turn it into Himself. Instead, in 6:35, He said to them I am the bread of life' [and not I will become the bread of life’]; he who comes to Me [and not `he who comes to a piece of earthly bread that I will turn into Myself] shall never be hue." There is no literal eating at all.

Jesus responds telling them that only a person who beleives that Jesus is the Son of God will be saved, and that he is indeed the “bread of life”. He reapeated several times that eternal life comes through beleiving. As someone said it “How many times does Jesus need to say it?”

With just the host it wont satisfied your physical hunger nor will sustain you with physical life, even taken daily. So what it means “food indeed” if it doesnt neet the characteristics of physical food?

Let me say that it is completely insulting to say that Jews don’t understand spiritual truths. They invented them!

Post something different .you keep using the same stuff over and over again. It is redundant.

So my question to you is : is that all you got? It’s not impressive .if you want to sway people you gotta have more than you’ve given here.
You are reading over the same website or someone just keeps telling you to keep repeating until you wear us down!
As the say in the " Matrix" , free your mind". Look over the top of the box. Stop conforming to other people’s viewpoints and look beyond the print in the scripture. I would suggest leaving the bible behind for a couple of days and just have one on one intimate time with the
Lord.
You’ll earn more than just mere words.