Are you implying that the Apostles did not know what Jesus meant when He said “this is my Body” and “this is my Blood”? Do you think they did not connect it to His sermon on the Bread of Life?
Why do you insist that it has to be in the Last Supper accounts. Doesn’t it matter to you what Jesus said? I can’t believe you only want to make this about the Last Supper accounts. Jesus said that HE is the BREAD that we have to EAT, meaning “chew” or “munch” that it is real food. Those are the words that Jesus used. And Jesus said those words to the Apostles so that they know to “do this in memory” of Him (Jesus).
16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
John 6:66 is the verse where they walked away. I know that is the DR-V but in all other bibles the verse is John 6:66 666
:banghead: Ouch, I have a headache. I’ll just offer it up for you. You won’t understand that but I’ll do it anyway.
It’s a little wierd how some of the coordinates/locations for passages of sacred scripture change in certain bibles; like the Miserere: Instead of being written either as Psalm 50 or Psalm 51, sometimes they write it like this- Psalm 51 (Psalm 50).
Thanks for the compliments. What I ask my parents, whom I love, but are still members of a Calvinist church is… What did the early fathers say?
Go back in history and examine what the ECF said about the real presence. Since apostolic times, Christians have always believed in the real presence, and not the real absence.
The symbolic view of the Eucharist didn’t come about until the past 400 years or so.
The problem with this interpretation is that the bread is not “flesh” nor is the bread physically alive. Paul is speaking metaphorically and not literally. We know this because there are no physical changes to the bread. It still remains bread.
Good point. The lamb pointed to something else just as the bread and wine point to something else. Taking something physical into your body changes nothing spiritually i.e. in your spirit.
Where does Jesus or the apostles teach that “we have to eat in order for us to be one body in Christ”?
Again He was not speaking in a literal sense. Rather it is by faith in Christ that we are joined to Him (See Romans 6). A person does not become a Christian by taking communion but by faith in Christ.
The Catholic church is making a claim that John 6 is about the last supper. If this is true we should see a direct connection to it in the gospels. The fact that we don’t tells us that something else is meant in John 6 that has nothing to do with the supper accounts. We also know that if we take a literal understanding of John 6 in regards to eating and drinking His flesh we would arrive at an absurd conclusion.
No, “we” realize that Christ is truly present in the Holy Eucharist…As He said he would be. You have come to an anti-biblical and an anti-Christian conclusion, based on a bad interpretation of Scripture.
It is quite clear He said nothing of the sort. This is why the Catholic Church does not teach this.
It is certainly up to you if you wish to call Jesus a liar. Personally, I think it is a very risky practice, but you have demonstrated on CAF that you enjoy such risky practices. I think such behavior has eternal consequences that I would not want to face.
Your statements are very similar to those made by the unbelieiving Pharisees who rejected Christ. You would even have a hard time defending this concept with all the indiginous tribes of the world who use hallucinogenic substances to have experiences of the divine. Perhaps you would consider a Peyote ceremony sometime? If you did, you would not be making such silly statements as this.
This is a more advanced Teaching, and I don’t think you are ready for it yet. I think it makes more sense to focus on the elementary principles until you have mastered those.
The Catholic Church agrees with you. Jesus and the Apostles taught that it was through baptism that we are born again, and brought into the Kingdom. The sharing of His Body and Blood in the Holy Eucharist is not intended for the unitiated.
Since that chapter was written by, for, and about Catholics, don’t you think it stands to reason they knew what they meant when it was written?
Do you think that John six is not part of the gospel?
You have stated before that when you use this royal “we” you are referring to “true christians” that are “bible christians”. So I guess what you are saying is that you and the rest of the “true bible” believers really don’t perceive what you are reading in the scriptures. This puts me in mind of what Jesus said to the Pharisees - that you read and read, searching for Christ, but do not come to HIm that you may have life.
It is true that some of the Teachings of Christianity do sound absurd to the carnal mind. The cross is another one of these -folly to the world. Such a response reflects an unregenerate mind.
If he were to accept this, he would have to become Catholic, and he must not allow that to happen!
The problem you have is that the scriptures don’t support the conclusions you and others are drawing. Is it not true that the catholic church teaches that the bread and wine actually becomes the body of Christ?
What this means is that Christ is now the bread and the wine that has been consecrated?
New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia