Drinking of blood/pagan practice?

  • Thread starter Thread starter heisey8
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sonseeker:

**We have been explaining it to you over and over again and still you reject the truth. **
It is in plain text and written clearly and said by Jesus himself:

47 Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; 50 this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world." 52 The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?” 53 Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. 54 Whoever eats 19 my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.” -John 6:47-58

**How much clearer can it get? He says “…is true food…” and “…true drink.” You protestants say this is symbolic and then take the creation in Genesis as literal. It’s hypocrisy. Stop denying the truth. For if you deny the truth you condemn yourself. **

:blessyou:
 
Roman_Army said:
Roman Army:

We have been explaining it to you over and over again and still you reject the truth

How much clearer can it get? He says “…fruit of the vine…” in Mat 26, and “…fruit of the vine” In Mk 14, and “…fruit of the vine” in Lk 22:18. You Catholics say this is literal and then take the creation in Genesis as symbolic. (Although some say you can take it anyway you want, there are so many different understandings within your religion). It’s hypocrisy. Stop denying the truth. For if you deny the truth you condemn yourself.
Click to expand...
 
In order to understand the verses in Acts you must understand the Jewish Kosher laws. It was absolutely forbidden for a Jewish person to eat blood. Animals were slaughtered in a manner that insured the removal of a lot of the blood, and then the meat was salted to draw out and remove the blood. HEre is a site that describes the modern orthodox Jewish Kosher laws. At the bottom of the page it discusses Salting the meat.

kashrusstandards.com/about_kosher_meat.htm

If we take the verses to mean what sonseeker is suggesting then we as Christians should adopt all the Jewish Kosher laws regarding draining blood.

These laws help explain though why the act of communion seemed so radical to the Jewish leaders. It also explains why some of Jesus’ followers left when He talked about eating his flesh and drinking his blood in John 6.
 
40.png
heisey8:
Hi again,
I need a bit of help again. My bible christian friend is now saying that the drinking of blood was condemned in the OT and NT, so therefore why would Christ command us to drink His blood. I’m not sure I can get into the theology of the accidents vs. the substance, but I’ll take anything! She is also saying, which I know is true, that consuming flesh and blood are pagan and Satanic rituals. I’d like to argue that they are “bastardizations” of the Truth, but I’m not sure that’ll fly.
Thanks again,
Nicole
Click to expand...
So, does your friend only eat meat that has been drained of its blood? Or is he a vegetarian? Eating flesh and drinking blood are so pagan and all…
 
40.png
deb1:
In order to understand the verses in Acts you must understand the Jewish Kosher laws. It was absolutely forbidden for a Jewish person to eat blood. Animals were slaughtered in a manner that insured the removal of a lot of the blood, and then the meat was salted to draw out and remove the blood. HEre is a site that describes the modern orthodox Jewish Kosher laws. At the bottom of the page it discusses Salting the meat.

kashrusstandards.com/about_kosher_meat.htm

If we take the verses to mean what sonseeker is suggesting then we as Christians should adopt all the Jewish Kosher laws regarding draining blood.

These laws help explain though why the act of communion seemed so radical to the Jewish leaders. It also explains why some of Jesus’ followers left when He talked about eating his flesh and drinking his blood in John 6.
Click to expand...
Why do you ignore the fact that the first edict against blood is given when there were no Kosher Laws, no Levitical laws, and no Jews? The commands of James in Acts were to GENTILE BELIEVERS, Jewish believers were already observing them. The reason they left in John 6 is because they misunderstood; they took Him literally, when He meant it figuratively; Matthew, Mark, Luke make this clear; Christ calls the drink “fruit of the vine,” (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:25; Lk 22:18).

What do you do with the Gen 9 passage? Dismiss it, because it doesn’t fit with your beliefs? Explain to me the Gen 9 passage.
 
40.png
sonseeker:
Why do you ignore the fact that the first edict against blood is given when there were no Kosher Laws, no Levitical laws, and no Jews? The commands of James in Acts were to GENTILE BELIEVERS, Jewish believers were already observing them. The reason they left in John 6 is because they misunderstood; they took Him literally, when He meant it figuratively; Matthew, Mark, Luke make this clear; Christ calls the drink “fruit of the vine,” (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:25; Lk 22:18).

What do you do with the Gen 9 passage? Dismiss it, because it doesn’t fit with your beliefs? Explain to me the Gen 9 passage.
Click to expand...
Actually, Gen 9 fits in with the Kosher laws that I just cited.
 
40.png
deb1:
Actually, Gen 9 fits in with the Kosher laws that I just cited.
Click to expand...
And where exactly are these Kosher laws found? Remember, there was no Jewish/Israelistish nation in Gen 9, and there were no Levitical laws at that time. How does that work?
 
40.png
sonseeker:
The reason they left in John 6 is because they misunderstood; they took Him literally, when He meant it figuratively
Click to expand...
Hmmm, so Jesus let them leave over a misunderstanding? Because He used a bad, confusing metaphor? That’s not cool:rolleyes:

Why would Jesus make a grave sin (eating flesh and drinking blood) a symbol of having faith in Him?
 
40.png
Genesis315:
Hmmm, so Jesus let them leave over a misunderstanding? Because He used a bad, confusing metaphor? That’s not cool:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
There are many not confused by the metaphor, and He quite commonly left people in their misunderstanding, in fact, He did so more often than not. What does *cool *have to do with it?

Exactly! Why would He? He wouldn’t; that is the point.Why would He literally have anyone to commit a grave sin?
 
40.png
sonseeker:
There are many not confused by the metaphor, and He quite commonly left people in their misunderstanding, in fact, He did so more often than not. What does *cool *have to do with it?
Click to expand...
Oops, sorry, you responded before I had time to edit. I had added another question. My bad.
 
Was this your answer to my added question?
“Why would Jesus make a grave sin (eating flesh and drinking blood) a symbol of having faith in Him?”
40.png
sonseeker:
Exactly! Why would He? He wouldn’t; that is the point.
Click to expand...
Ummm, you just said that it’s a symbol. He says specifically to drink His blood. This means it’s either literal or symbolic. According to you, drinking His blood would be a grave sin and according to you He is using drinking His blood as a symbol. Why would He use a grave sin as a symbol of something that gives everlasting life? My argument is that drinking His blood is not a grave sin, but something very good.
 
Sonseeker:

The belief in the symbolism of the Eucharist did not exist until the 1600 AD by a heretical movement. What does that tell you? The Lutheran Church which is the original protestant church believes in the Eucharist. What does that tell you?
 
40.png
Genesis315:
Was this your answer to my added question?
“Why would Jesus make a grave sin (eating flesh and drinking blood) a symbol of having faith in Him?”

Ummm, you just said that it’s a symbol. He says specifically to drink His blood. This means it’s either literal or symbolic. According to you, drinking His blood would be a grave sin and according to you He is using drinking His blood as a symbol. Why would He use a grave sin as a symbol of something that gives everlasting life? My argument is that drinking His blood is not a grave sin, but something very good.
Click to expand...
I do not see it as either or. I see it as symbol. Why would He use a grave sin literally to give everlasting life? Why do the other three Gospel writers refer to it as “fruit of the vine” (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:25; Lk 22:18)?
 
Roman_Army said:
Sonseeker:

The belief in the symbolism of the Eucharist did not exist until the 1600 AD by a heretical movement. What does that tell you? The Lutheran Church which is the original protestant church believes in the Eucharist. What does that tell you?
Click to expand...

Obviously it existed on the very night that Christ said it. He did not cut open a vein and bleed into the cup; He offered them wine.
 
Nicole,

Yes, drinking blood is a pagan practice, but then so is the exchange of rings at a wedding. And in Scotland the good Presbyterians there will gladly serve you some blood pudding.
  • Liberian
 
40.png
sonseeker:
I do not see it as either or. I see it as symbol. Why would He use a grave sin literally to give everlasting life? Why do the other three Gospel writers refer to it as “fruit of the vine” (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:25; Lk 22:18)?
Click to expand...
You’re still saying that He is using a grave sin as a symbol for something good.

According to you drinking the wine symbolizes drinking His blood. How does this jive with your idea that drinking His blood is a grave sin?

According to you, in John 6 when He says to drink His blood, He is symbolizing something. Why is He using a grave sin as a symbol?
 
40.png
sonseeker:
Why would He use a grave sin literally to give everlasting life?
Click to expand...
He wouldn’t. He was quite clear and literal by His own words. It’s a real stretch to see it symbolically. 😃
 
40.png
sonseeker:
Obviously it [the belief in symbolism] existed on the very night that Christ said it.
Click to expand...
I doubt that all the early Christians got it wrong. According to that line of thinking, even Ignatius of Antioch, who was a disciple of St John, got it wrong. :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top