J
Jon_Hus
Guest
OK, go ahead and as you say “take into consideration” the Jewish audiance Jesus was speaking to and make your case.
- Status
C
CONFUSED1111
Guest
I’m very familiar with the charismatic movement in CC, specially linked to fr. James Manjackal. Jesus IS PRESENT IN THE EUCHARIST.
I have been present when fr.James, together with a few more priest, has performed exorcism…I have seen teenagers REALLY OBSESSED BY DEMONS. For an example, a girl, abt 12 years old, standing half a meter from me, changed the expression of her face and started TO TALK WITH MAN’S VOICE IN “ORIGINAL” ENGLISH LANGUAGE (she is Croat), CURSING fr. JAMES and JESUS.
Do you know when her transformation took place? ONLY WHEN THE BLESSED ALTAR SACRAMENT, WITH THE EUCHARIST IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, WAS TURNED TO HER FACE!
D
Dokimas
Guest
D
Dokimas
Guest
The Ark remaining and the Presence of God are two different things as I understand it. The Presence (Shekinah Glory) was not always between the cheribim, if my memory serves me correctly.
The Whole Tabernacle represented Jesus. It was a replica of the Real One in Heaven.
Why was it bad to eat meat offered to idols? Surely not because the idol lived in the meat. It was because of what it represented, was it not?
Seems to me there’s an issue of obedience verses disobedience. What’s the big deal about eating the fruit of the wrong Tree? Wasn’t it an obedience problem?
R
rev_kevin
Guest
No I don’t. There is nothing in my post to indicate the real presence of Jesus.rev kevin,
Very little to disagree with there. So you believe in the Real Presence?
R
Richard_Kastner
Guest
Jn.6:32Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
33For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
34Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.
35And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
36But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
Jesus equates Himself with the bread of life and eating that bread gives life through faith in Him.
Jn.6:53Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
Here He says eating His flesh will give the same eternal life as eating the bread of life.
Jn.63bthe words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
The words that Jesus speaks they are spirit and the same life
Jn.1:14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,
The word was made flesh? Could it be that Jesus when He said “unless you eat the flesh of the son of man” was talking about His words that are spirit and the bread of life and that eating His words (believing what He says) will give you eternal life?
T
Third_Day
Guest
=
Jesus did not say “His flesh” was of no avail but "the " flesh. Our flesh is of no use. It will die. THe Spirit is true life. It is eternal. Jesus is saying that the natural understanding, “the flesh” devoid of God’s spirit, profits and understands nothing.
Why did they leave Him if it was symbolic? They took Jesus literally and Jesus did not call them back. He did not say, as He does in John 16:25 “I have said this to you in** figures**”
And in John 16:29 "His disciples said "AH, now you are speaking plainly, not in any figures"
You need to answer why many disciples left and Jesus did not call them back and say “I am speaking in figures”. He couldn’t say that because that would have been a lie.
Jesus says if you come to Him and believe you will never hunger or thirst. Clearly symbolic. As a Christian I am sure that sometime today you will hunger and you will thirst.
Exactly. His flesh and the bread are one and the same. He IS the bread of life. In verse 51 (which you skipped ) Jesus says “and **the bread **which shall give for the life of the world is my flesh” Did Jesus give symbolic flesh or real flesh on the cross “for the life of the world?” Jesus clearly says the bread which I shall give is my flesh. Immediately those listening say “how can this man give us his flesh to eat”. They understood Jesus perfectly.
Once again you skip over verses. Why? Verse 55 “my flesh is food indeed my blood is food indeed”
You left out the first part of verse 63. "Verse 63 says “It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail, the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life”
Jesus did not say “His flesh” was of no avail but "the " flesh. Our flesh is of no use. It will die. THe Spirit is true life. It is eternal. Jesus is saying that the natural understanding, “the flesh” devoid of God’s spirit, profits and understands nothing.
IF that is true, why in verse 66 did “many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him” Why didn’t Jesus say " I meant my flesh is the word I speak"
Why did they leave Him if it was symbolic? They took Jesus literally and Jesus did not call them back. He did not say, as He does in John 16:25 “I have said this to you in** figures**”
And in John 16:29 "His disciples said "AH, now you are speaking plainly, not in any figures"
You need to answer why many disciples left and Jesus did not call them back and say “I am speaking in figures”. He couldn’t say that because that would have been a lie.
F
FantomScholar
Guest
Third, if I may ask you a question. When you say that the Jews took Jesus literally, what do you mean by this? Do you mean that they understood Jesus to be referring to the Eucharist (which seems unlikely given that it hadn’t been instituted yet), or that they understood Jesus literally in the sense of carnal cannibalism?
R
Richard_Kastner
Guest
Jn.6:60Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
This is a hard saying. They thought He was talking about canniballism.
61When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
62What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
Jesus as He did so many times before makes it a matter of faith. Would they believe Him if they saw Him in heaven sitting on His throne of glory. If so why not believe Him as the carpenter’s son?
When Jesus gave this discoarse He was approaching the end of His public life. He had performed many miracles and wonders. Earlier in Jn.6 some of the very people He is talking to latter follow Him across the sea and He says
Jn.6:26Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
They wanted another free meal.
27Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.
He then tells them to labor for the meat that does not perish.
28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Jesus then makes it about faith. Faith in Him because He has shown them that He is the son of God and is worthy of thier faith.
63It is the spirit that quickeneth;(gives life) the flesh profiteth nothing: (the spirit of this world or sin) the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
The words that He speaks are from the Spirit of God and it is these words that give eternal life.
64But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
Ok, here we get into the reason He did not call them back. Remember He is talking to many that followeed Him over the sea of Gallilee to get a free meal. He knows thier hearts. He knew that some believed not. So why call them back?
65And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
These people had not accepted the greatest gift that was ever given. He was standing right in front of them and they accepted Him not.
Jn1:6There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
**11He came unto his own, and his own received him not. **
66From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
So, when they saw that they weren’t going to get another meal. When they thought that He started to talk about cannibalism. Because of thier hardened hearts. They walked away.
67Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
Now Jesus, still without any explanation turns to His disciples and asks if they also will go away? Jesus also knew thier hearts. Notice the vastly different responce of a faithful heart.
68Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
Peter apparently understands that Jesus is talking about His words
69And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
They believe that Jesus is the Christ, the annointed, the son of the living God. They believe He is who He says He is.
R
rev_kevin
Guest
Lets look at the context of John 16:25 and 29 but first we must look back at John 6. 44-58.
Verse 44, “No man can come to me except the Father which hast sent me draw draw him…” St. Augustin answeres from the poet. Thrhit sua quemque voluptas; a man is attracted by that which he delights in. Show green herbage to a sheep, he is drawn by it, show muts to a child and he is drawn by them. They run wherever the person runs who shows these things. They run after him, but they are not forced to follow. they run, through the desire they feel to get the things they delight in. So God drawa man, he shows him his wants, he shows the Savior whom he has provided of him.
Verse 47 Has everlasting life. He is entitled to this, on his believing Jesus to be the Messiah, and trusting in him alone for salvation. The preson who is saved is, drawn by the Father, hears his instructions, accepts the salvation offered, is given to Christ Jesus that he may be justified by faith, is nourshed by the bread of life, persevers in the faith, is not lost, but is raised uo at the last day, and is make a partaker of eternal lffe.
Verse 48 I am the bread of life. I [Jesus] alone afford, by my doctrine and Spirit, that mourishment by which th e soul is saved into eternal life.
Verse 50 Jesus came for this very purpose, that men may believe in him, and have eternal life.
Verse 51 Is my flesh, which I will give you. Jesus explains his meaning more fully, in these words than he had done before. Having spoken so much of the bread which feeds and nourishes the soul. and preserves from death, the attention of his hearers was fixed upon his words, which to them appeared inexplicable and they desired to know what their meaning was. He then told them that the brread meant his flesh, [his life] which he was about to give up, to save the life of the world. Here Jesus plainly declares that his death was to be a vicarious sacrifice and atonement for the sin of the world, and that, as no human life could be preserved unless there was bread [proper nourishment] received, so no soul could be saved but by the merit of his death.
R
rev_kevin
Guest
Continued
Verse 52 How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Jesus removes this difficulty and answers the question in verse 63 Its the Spiritual sense only of his words that is to be attended to and though which life is to be attained. The flesh profit nothing, If you could even eat my [Jesus] flesh and drink my blood, this would not avail for your salvation. These words contain a caution that the hearers should not understand his words in the strict “literal” sense, as if the body were raally bread and as if his flesh and blood were really to be eaten and drank.
Verse 53 Unless you be made partakers of the blessings about to be purchased by his blood, passion, and violent death, you cannot be saved. Bishop Pearce justly observes taht the idea of eating and drinking are here borrowed to express partaking of, and sharing in. Thus spiritual happiness on earth and even in heaven is expressed by eating and drinking.
John 16:25 In proverbs, That is words which besides their plain, literal meaning, have another, a spiritual or figurative one. I [Jesus] have represented heavenly things to you through the medium of earthly.
The time will come. Its the interval from his resurrection to his ascension, which consisted of 40 days, during which he instructed his disciples in the most sublime mysteries and truths of his kingdom.
At least you are speaking plainly. The disciples received more light now, on the nature of Jesus’ person and office, than they had ever done before.
Now we understant that you know everything and don’t need to tell you anything. We believe that you are not only Messiah who came out from God but that you are the God who searches the heart and triest the reins, and need not to ask in order to make us acquainted with the necessities of your creatures. for you perfectly know their wants and are infinitely disposed to relieve them.
Then as we go through the rest of John there is nothing about Jesus being in the bread and wine. There is no mention of it at all. In order to get the meaning of what was being said one must look a few vrerses ahead and some after.
T
Third_Day
Guest
Yes. Jesus was referring to the Eucharist which He would give to the Church at the Last Supper which would take place the following passover.
The Jews and disciples believed that Jesus was telling them to literally eat his flesh and drink His blood. That is why they said this is a hard saying. They were thinking in terms of cannibilism. They couldn’t comprehend that Jesus was speaking in terms of a miraculous sacrament. That is exactly what he did at the next passover when He tookd bread and said “this IS my body”.
T
Third_Day
Guest
Yes. Absolutely
.
Exactly and yet disciples that had followed him for years** walked away ** and followed Him no more
Look at verse 30." Then what** sign do you **do that we may see, and believe you?" Jesus then tells the the “sign” he will give then. It is that He is the bread of Life and if you eat his bread you will live forever. They refused to understand His sign They said it was “a hard saying”.
Exactly. And what meat does not perish? The body and blood of God will never perish and Jesus is telling them a way that they will be able to have this flesh. They do not understand.
To believe in the Eucharist it takes faith. To believe what He was about to tell them takes faith and they did not have it so they walked away.
Yes **His words **“he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. My flesh is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed”
What did they not believe? That they thought they were going to get a free meal and they got a speach about eating His flesh? ???
Scripture says “after this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about Him”. Are you trying to say that his disciples who followed Him for two years and say miracles left because they didn’t get a free meal???
Faith is a gift from God. The Eucharist is a gift from God and many do not accept it.
.
Yes! They “thought” He was talking about cannibilism. Jesus knew this is what they thought. and he did not correct them. He did not say “I am speaking in figures” like He does in John 16:25 He was talking about the miracles of miracles. Changing bread into His body. He would become the passover lamb
They did not understand but they had faith.
Everything Jesus says is important.
And because of their faith, Jesus showed them at the next passover exactly what He was talking about in John 6. He would give them the power to change bread and wine into His body and blood. “Do this in rememberance of me”
T
Third_Day
Guest
We come to God by faith which is a free gift.
I thought you believe in faith ALONE?
Jesus simply says He is the bread of life. You have added that the bread means “doctrine”.
Jesus says that men can eat this bread and they will not die.
In verse 51 He says the bread…IS His flesh and if anyone EATS this bread he will “live forever”
.
Exactly. He did not give symbolic flesh on the cross but real flesh and the bread IS THAT same flesh.
That’s not exacty what verse 51 says. Jesus says the "bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh"
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Gee, “Rev”…so you figure that Jesus intended that we should cut off our hands and rip out our eyes? C’mon, there’s nothing that even remotely indicates a symbolism in John 6 and it’s very clear that St. Paul didn’t take it that way. (The Eucharist IS Scriptural)
It’s not the fault of the Catholic Church that so many of the communities of modern post reformation step children fail (http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/emo-epicfail.png) to properly interpret the Word of God. St Ignatius of Antioch was one of the very earliest Church fathers to write about what they taught about this from the apostles themselves.
Look at what he said.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Does not the body contain the blood? We are not legalistic about this but offer it under both species. N-C legalism is almost as bad as the pharisees were…
Oh and you conveniently quit quoting St. Paul too soon didn’t you? He goes on to say, "27 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. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.
I’ll add here something that I posted long ago to make that 2nd passage clear for you.
Code:
If there is no real presence in the Eucharist, then how can St.Paul warn us not to take it unworthily lest we become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord? That "spiritualization" makes complete nonsense not only of the 6th chapter of John, but of 1st Corinthians 10:16-17 "16 The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? 17 For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread."23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.
26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 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. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many inform and weak among you, and many sleep.
Now, how can one become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord IF THAT BODY AND BLOOD OF THE LORD IS NOT REALLY THERE? Now if I make a symbol of Karl Keating like this symbol here:
and then I decide to do bad things to that symbol symbol…like say this: http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/blowup1.gif I may indeed be guilty of abusing that symbol of the goodman Karl Keating, but am I guilty of his body and blood? Silly question…of course not! Why? BECAUSE KARL KEATING IS NOT REALLY PRESENT IN THAT SYMBOL is he?There is the the whole case for why the Eucharist really is the presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ…body and blood, soul and divinity.
Catholics! You have the greatest miracle of all at every Mass that you participate in. BE THERE!
Pax vobiscum,
P.S. To Karl Keating, and the mods: no offense intended
C
Church_Militant
Guest
T
Third_Day
Guest
.
Nice try Rev. It is after verse 63 that the disciples walked away. They were there. You were not. They didn’t connect a "Spiritual sense " to eating His flesh and blood
. Are you saying that the flesh of Jesus, that He sacrificed, profits “Nothing?” You are also contradicting what Jesus just got through saying. “He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life”
Verse 63 is contrasting the natural or carnal man(the flesh) with the spiritual or faith-filled man…
Look at how Paul discribes the un-spiritual man in 1 Cor. 2:14 “the **unspiritual man **does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God for they are folly to him”
.
That’s not what Jesus says in verse 53. He says “Truly, Truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood you have no live in you”
It is true that we partake and share in Him when we eat His flesh and Blood in the Eucharist.
YES, YES. In John 16:25 Jesus admits that He is speaking in figures. Why didn’t He do that in John 6?? Because he wasn’t speaking in figures. that’s why!
What else does John need to do? John 6 says it all. The crucifixon is only mentioned ONCE in John. Does that mean it isn’t true?
I agree. So why did you have to jump around and skip verses to come up with your explanation?
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Nah, I figure the reason you guys take it that way is because you have no choice or your entire theology collapses. That collapse is precisely why there are so many people like me who have objectively compared what we were preached and taught among you n-Cs with both the Word of God and the teachings of the Catholic Church and have reverted or converted.
Most n-C doctrines do not agree with either the New Testament or the authentic writings of the earliest Christians, (as exemplified by The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans as cited above).
Why? Here’s my own thinking on it.
My Reformation Theory
C
Church_Militant
Guest
It’s not “carnal cannibalism” and I’ll thank you to discuss Catholic issues with better respect and without the uncharitable anti-Catholic rhetoric if you intend to enter discussions/debates here at CAF. That’s just way out of line sir!
If you wouldn’t appreciate it if I came into your home (and CAF is the internet home of a lot of Catholics) and said something similar about your own Baptist faith, like “your Baptist Eternal Security of the believer is tantamount to a free pass to do anything you please because you’re ‘saved’ and can’t ever be lost.” (which I would not do as it would not be at all Christ-like), then perhaps you should think carefully before you tap that “submit” button from now on here at CAF.
I, and most of the Catholics here, will discuss/debate most anything with most anybody, but that kind of rhetoric is totally uncalled for and a sincere apology would be much appreciated.Now in response to your question… The Jews knew, even as any objective reader of John 6 would, that Jesus had made no effort at all to qualify or explain anything different. Not even to his own apostles who, the New Testament says, were often explained things on the side, but Our Lord made it a clear make or break test when He asked them outright, “…Will you also go away?” (John 6:68). The apostles, took him at His literal word just as we Catholics have for 2,010 years.
- Status