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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Marcos100
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
10gr8kids said:
Common sense should tell you that doesn’t work. If it did we wouldn’t have so many people who read the Bible alone and don’t agree on what it teaches.

Baptism is necessary/not
Communion every week/once a year
Musical instruments/no musiical instruments
Women preachers/no women preachers
OSAS/possible to lose salvation
Clapping hands in church is sinful/Spirit filled dancing in the aisle

This list could go on and on. I know many Protestants and even within their own churches they don’t agree about everything. One thing I do believe is that they all sincerely believe that they have the correct interpretation and are sincerely trying to do the right thing.
Click to expand...
iLL TELL YOU AGAIN , THEY MUST BE VIOLITING A RULES OF INTEPRETATION
 
Marcos100 said:
iLL TELL YOU AGAIN , THEY MUST BE VIOLITING A RULES OF INTEPRETATION
Click to expand...
Unless you claim that you can infallibly interpret the scriptures using your “COMMON SENSE RULES” you should realize you might very well be WRONG!
 
slh3016 said:
No, why can’t you see it? You interpretation would require the verse to read, “For the bread of God is he WHO HAS COME or WHO CAMEdown from heaven and gives life to the world.”

Since Jesus uses the present tense verbs “comes” and “gives”, your interpretation doesn’t work (apologists, correct me if I’m wrong).

Your interpretation would require a past tense of “comes” which would be either “came” or “has come” if Jesus was talking about the here and now because, obviously, He was already on the earth at that exact moment. This verb tense implies that Jesus is talking of some future event in which He comes down from heaven (as the bread) and gives life to the world (i.e., at every Eucharist). You can’t mix up your verb tenses.
Click to expand...
the disciple did have life before comunion and before the Cross.
 
slh3016 said:
Okay, after rethinking my response, I realized that I may have misspoke or misrepresented John 6:33. In light of other verses in the passage, Jesus obviously “IS” the bread of life currently in that exact moment, but what I was trying to say is that they is likely a dual meaning in the verb tenses used in John 6 since, of course, one could not partake of Jesus’s body at that exact moment because it had not been offered yet as the sin offering for the world. The world was still under the old covenant, which included the Jewish Passover.

Therefore, John 6:33 also implicates that at some time in the future, Jesus will come down from heaven and will be (literally and figuratively) the bread of life, which I understand to mean the Eucharist, which is offered every day around the world thousands of times. Partaking in the Eucharist is participating in the reality of the eternal Passover, not merely symbolizing it.

I also would like to ask regarding your comment about being a Catholic for 20 years. Does that mean you converted to Catholicism and then later left again, or were you raised in the faith and left as a young adult? It would help to know what past influences have guided your thinking.
Click to expand...
the disciplesDID have life before the last supper and before comunion.
 
Marcos100 said:
Read your Bible, please.
Click to expand...
I read write and teach scripture.So get off your high horse cause it’s gonna hurt when you fall.
First there are no universal set
Rules for biblical interpretation.
Next is that Jesus was born to die so salvation could come into the world. That’s basic Christianity , if someone is teaching you otherwise you are not a Christian.
I think you better read your bible starting with the Prologue of the Gospel of John.apparently you must have fallen asleep during some of the more important parts.
use a good translation and not some like the" New World" translation which is pure tripe.
You are dealing with strange fire here. Watch you don’t get burned.
 
Marcos100 said:
This is a good one,

eternal-productions.org/PDFS/The%20Eucharist%20Biblical%20Review.pdf
I dont agree in all the point thoguh, but I would give it an 8
Click to expand...
I would be ashamed to be making money on bigotry and stupidity.
And why the obsession with us?smacks of envy ,jealousy and a lack of understanding the beatitudes, which is one of the flyover zones in protestantism because that really doesn’t
Gel With sola fidei.must give some the vapours.
It’s really hateful (which doesn’t seem to bother you ,but should and against Christ’s prayer that we all be one,(which seems like another command of Jesus you overlook or give a damn about) As long as she you can get your hate on you are good to go.no introspection or circumspection just blind will to put the hurt on Catholics ,and the unhealthy obsession with everything catholic.It must gall you to death that the majority of Catholics wake up and don’t think about you guys at all .we kinda let you do your thing without being overly concerned and hold no animus toward you. Until you start pushing buttons ,that is not the way to make friends and influence people. That pure ignorance on your part and others is that you openly defy Jesus’s command to love one another as I have loved you.which is endlessly, more than 7 x 7. The hypocrisy alone is staggering.You say you know all the right stuff but don’t seem humble enough to obey Jesus’s command to put love above all. That angers me because the biggest problem outside of Christendom is we preach love but don’t use love even to other Christian brethren. We will self destruct! We have the barbarians at the gate , Christians dying and atheism drying out the souls of humanity and the main concern is that you try to show others(mainly Catholics because you once were one and you gotta prove to your new faithmates that you completely destroyed any of the icky catholic stuff by trying to hurt feelings and agitating, that will show them .)
So as the USA remains nakedly open to having "Allah Akbar " catch phrase and who knows, head choppings in the local piggly wiggly ,maybe
We will come together to protect and aid one another?
 
Marcos100 said:
You are denying the teaching, he reitarated what he taught.…

All physical language can be used for symbolic language. they decievded you. The jews wrongly asked Jesus literal bread. And Jesus didnt give them Literal bread. but he told them to come to him and beleive in Him.
Click to expand...
No … You are denying the fullness of the Christian faith - You do not cully comprehend the scriptures …

And - Jesus said that His Flesh was … not merely food, not metaphorical food … But TRUE FOOD INDEED … and His Blood was not mere drink, not metaphorical drink , But TRUE DRINK INDEED …

I have read and studied the Scriptures … I understand parables and metaphors and symbolic language … I do not read this passage as you do … not because the Church told me what the passage means … I - of my own intellect have read the passage - in context and with other passages that address this same topic … I do not believe that you are correct - I believe that I am …

So here we are …

Marcos says it is a metaphor …

Yada says it is the Eucharist - it is Jesus - who gives us His Body and Blood in the Eucharist … that John is connected to the Last Supper - that it has to be real because Paul tells us that if we eat this Bread and Wine without discerning the Body and Blood we eat and drink it to our death and place our very salvation in jeopardy and the words of a mere metaphor with a symbolic eating of mere bread and wine cannot make a person sick or die.

Now Marcos … why should any reader here take your position over mine? Where does one go to get the definitive answer on who is right? … do they believe you? Or me? or any number of other posters that have offered and interpretation?.. Where do we settle this once and for all?

Where does the Scriptures direct the Christian to seek this “Truth” that is not so obvious if Marcos and Yada read the same passage but understand it differently and after discussing it cannot agree?
 
First When Jesus mentions his flesh he is talking litrrally, his flesh is himself. He gave his flesh literally on the cross.
Click to expand...
THAT’S the context Marcos100. And it doesn’t change in the next sentence.
 
juliamajor said:
I would be ashamed to be making money on bigotry and stupidity.
And why the obsession with us?smacks of envy ,jealousy and a lack of understanding the beatitudes, which is one of the flyover zones in protestantism because that really doesn’t
Gel With sola fidei.must give some the vapours.
It’s really hateful (which doesn’t seem to bother you ,but should and against Christ’s prayer that we all be one,(which seems like another command of Jesus you overlook or give a damn about) As long as she you can get your hate on you are good to go.no introspection or circumspection just blind will to put the hurt on Catholics ,and the unhealthy obsession with everything catholic.It must gall you to death that the majority of Catholics wake up and don’t think about you guys at all .we kinda let you do your thing without being overly concerned and hold no animus toward you. Until you start pushing buttons ,that is not the way to make friends and influence people. That pure ignorance on your part and others is that you openly defy Jesus’s command to love one another as I have loved you.which is endlessly, more than 7 x 7. The hypocrisy alone is staggering.You say you know all the right stuff but don’t seem humble enough to obey Jesus’s command to put love above all. That angers me because the biggest problem outside of Christendom is we preach love but don’t use love even to other Christian brethren. We will self destruct! We have the barbarians at the gate , Christians dying and atheism drying out the souls of humanity and the main concern is that you try to show others(mainly Catholics because you once were one and you gotta prove to your new faithmates that you completely destroyed any of the icky catholic stuff by trying to hurt feelings and agitating, that will show them .)
So as the USA remains nakedly open to having "Allah Akbar " catch phrase and who knows, head choppings in the local piggly wiggly ,maybe
We will come together to protect and aid one another?
Click to expand...
Julia. This is the United States of America! We can say what we think. Freedom of speech! We have the right to disagree with each other. The religious totalitarism of the Middle ages ended a long time ago. Freedom prevailed.
 
Marcos100 said:
the disciple did have life before comunion and before the Cross.
Click to expand...
Physical life, yes, but remember, heaven’s gates were not opened until Jesus’s death on the cross. Those in the old covenant who died went to Abraham’s bosom and Jesus went to hell to lead them from there to heaven, remember?!?!?

All the disciples died AFTER Jesus so they died as part of the new covenant. We have no example of a disciple dying before Jesus so YOU can’t assert anything about what would have happened to him. I would assume they would be waiting for Jesus in Abraham’s bosom as well 🤷
 
Marcos100 said:
Julia. This is the United States of America! We can say what we think. Freedom of speech! We have the right to disagree with each other. The religious totalitarism of the Middle ages ended a long time ago. Freedom prevailed.
Click to expand...
Yes, you’re right. We can say what we think under the laws of the USA, but what about God’s laws?!?! Just because you aren’t breaking one of America’s laws doesn’t mean you aren’t breaking God’s laws, of which He said to “love one another.”

I have the freedom to call you any number of things, but does that mean it’s right for me to do so?

Back to the main topic, though.

Please answer this question:

IF TWO PEOPLE DISAGREE OVER THE MEANING OF A VERSE OR PASSAGE OF SCRIPTURE, WHERE TO THEY GO TO RESOLVE THEIR DISAGREEMENT?

Since it appears that you ascribe to Sola Scriptura, extra-biblical sources obviously cannot be used. Give US a book, chapter, and verse for your answer.
 
How brother! You’ve been talking enough to choke a horse.according to your way of thinking, you have the right to say anything but my reciprocation is evil censorship.there is no power to be so on my part.
only the state can truly censor. Do you know where censorship came from and how and why it was used.obviously you do not. You’re just making another silly thoughtless remark that never really answers what has been stated. Apparently I hurt your feelings . I am sorry if I did. But you are like Ali in the ring .You want to “float like butterfly and sting like a bee.” Only when someone stings back you cannot hack it. When some returns a blow in debate you are supposed to be able to communicate back. Not fall back to childish foot stomping.
You keep repeating endless the same stuff. The idea of debate is to put out your point of view with fresh material after each round. You do not do so. That is why the general population on the topic is so frustrated. No clear answers ,no new point ,no fresh insights.
Boring and annoying. Then you fall back on the censorship card, which the state is empowered to do and other entities it wishes to give it to. Not individuals.So if you cannot compose a thoughtful response then you can benefit from debating classes. Depending on what city your in ,some school should have one.
You are out of your depth and there is nothing more painful then seeing a debater crash and
Burn and who doesn’t know enough to stop , drop , and roll.
To debate is attempting to get someone to at least sympathetic to your point of view.Not sympathetic to you as a human being. I am sure that their are personally sympathetic folks. They cannot but wonder why you are doing all this . Is to prove to yourself you made the right choice? there is no other reason be here accept a personal one. Debater cannot afford to drag personal stuff along in with everything else.
your audience is leaving and getting bored.they will not put up your antics for too much longer .Christ has been with me for a very long time as with many on this website.we have made commitments to Him .we follow Him as Lord and Saviour. It’s to bad you didn’t look deeper. We are not any more wicked than you or yours.we have the same rights to salvation as any one else who lives in Christ…it tests me to have assumptions made because of how I worship. That is bigotry.and it is always sinful because you cannot see other souls. That’s God’s job. Do not attempt to usurp God’s power.
 
Marcos100 said:
What kind of problem?
I do beleive there are authorities , but I dont beleive in infalibility, authorities are necesary
Click to expand...
I have read, re-read, and re-read again the Scriptures. I have prayed fervently to the Holy Spirit for guidance again and again. And this path of discernment from God leads me to disagree with your personal interpretation of John 6.

So who decides which of us is right? Who does Jesus tell us to go to for resolution of this disagreement? Who does St. Paul tells us to go to for resolution?

Please cite chapter and verse for your answer.
 
In one of your posts you stated that you had been a Catholic for twenty years…so when you were a Catholic did you eat and drink the body and blood of Jesus Christ believing that it was true food and true blood…or did you make a mockery of it by knowingly accepting yet inwardly rejecting at the same time…if the latter then you would have been committing blasphemy by insulting or showing contempt for what is considered religious…if on the other hand you did believe it was the true body and blood of Jesus Christ again you have made a mockery of it by rejecting what you once believed…and practiced…was indeed true…and once again you have… and still are… blaspheming against the Son of God…sounds harsh but sometimes the truth is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top