John 6

[jimmy]

So, you believe that 2000 years worth of theologians, apostles, and saints are wrong, yet you are correct with your new interpretation. That is pretty arrogant. You can have your new translation, I will take that of the apostles and early fathers of the church.

Here is some proof from the early fathers that the church fathers and the apostles taught the real presence.
Chapter VII.-Let Us Stand Aloof from Such Heretics.
They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer,44 because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death45 in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect,46 that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of47 them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved.48 But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.
They are ashamed of the cross; they mock at the passion; they make a jest of the resurrection. They are the offspring of that spirit who is the author of all evil, who led Adam,49 by means of his wife, to transgress the commandment, who slew Abel by the hands of Cain, who fought against Job, who was the accuser of Joshua50 the son of Josedech, who sought to "sift the faith"51 of the apostles, who stirred up the multitude of the Jews against the Lord, who also now "worketh in the children of disobedience;52 from whom the Lord Jesus Christ will deliver us, who prayed that the faith of the apostles might not fail,53 not because He was not able of Himself to preserve it, but because He rejoiced in the pre-eminence of the Father. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and neither in private nor in public to talk with54 them; but to give heed to the law, and the prophets, and to those who have preached to you the word of salvation. But flee from all abominable heresies, and those that cause schisms, as the beginning of evils.
biblefacts.org/ecf/vol1/anf01-21.htm#P2123_357530

 

[jimmy]

The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians

Chapter XX.-Exhortations to Stedfastness and Unity.
If Jesus Christ shall graciously permit me through your prayers, and if it be His will, I shall, in a second little work which I will write to you, make further manifest to you [the nature of] the dispensation of which I have begun [to treat], with respect to the new man, Jesus Christ, in His faith and in His love, in His suffering and in His resurrection. Especially [will I do thishttp://www.biblefacts.org/ecf/vol1/footnote/fn13.htm#P1374_246390”]139 ] if the Lord make known to me that ye come together man by man in common through grace, individually,140 in one faith, and in Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David according to the flesh, being both the Son of man and the Son of God, so that ye obey the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying, but [which causes] that we should live for ever in Jesus Christ.
Stand fast, brethren, in the faith of Jesus Christ, and in His love, in His passion, and in His resurrection. Do ye all come together in common, and individually,141 through grace, in one faith of God the Father, and of Jesus Christ His only-begotten Son, and "the first-born of every creature,"142 but of the seed of David according to the flesh, being under the guidance of the Comforter, in obedience to the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote which prevents us from dying, but a cleansing remedy driving away evil, [which causes] that we should live in God through Jesus Christ.
biblefacts.org/ecf/vol1/anf01-16.htm#P1093_206499

The Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians

Chapter IV.-Have But One Eucharist, Etc.
Take ye heed, then, to have but one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to [show forthhttp://www.biblefacts.org/ecf/vol1/footnote/fn19.htm#P1997_336123”]24 ] the unity of His blood; one altar; as there is one bishop, along with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants: that so, whatsoever ye do, ye may do it according to [the will of] God.
I have confidence of you in the Lord, that ye will be of no other mind. Wherefore I write boldly to your love, which is worthy of God, and exhort you to have but one faith, and one [kind of] preaching, and one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of the Lord Jesus Christ; and His blood which was shed for us is one; one loaf also is broken to all [the communicants], and one cup is distributed among them all: there is but one altar for the whole Church, and one bishop, with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants.
biblefacts.org/ecf/vol1/anf01-20.htm#P1941_328407

 

[jimmy]

The First Apology of Justin
Chapter LXVI.-Of the Eucharist.
And this food is called among us Eu0xaristi/a143 [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.144 For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me,145 this is My body; "and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood; "and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.
biblefacts.org/ecf/vol1/anf01-46.htm#P3593_620967

 

[jimmy]

Irenaeus

Book 4. Against Heresies.
Chapter XVII.-Proof that God Did Not Appoint the Levitical Dispensation for His Own Sake, or as Requiring Such Service; For He Does, in Fact, Need Nothing from Men.
5. Again, giving directions to His disciples to offer to God the first-fruits232 of His own, created things-not as if He stood in need of them, but that they might be themselves neither unfruitful nor ungrateful-He took that created thing, bread, and gave thanks, and said, "This is My body."233 And the cup likewise, which is part of that creation to which we belong, He confessed to be His blood, and taught the new oblation of the new covenant; which the Church receiving from the apostles, offers to God throughout all the world, to Him who gives us as the means of subsistence the first-fruits of His own gifts in the New Testament, concerning which Malachi, among the twelve prophets, thus spoke beforehand: "I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord Omnipotent, and I will not accept sacrifice at your hands. For from the rising of the sun, unto the going down [of the same], My name is glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure sacrifice; for great is My name among the Gentiles, saith the Lord Omnipotent; "234 -indicating in the plainest manner, by these words, that the former people [the Jews] shall indeed cease to make offerings to God, but that in every place sacrifice shall be offered to Him, and that a pure one; and His name is glorified among the Gentiles.235
biblefacts.org/ecf/vol1/anf01-62.htm#P7979_2198226

 

[jimmy]

Irenaeus Book 4. Against Heresies.
Chapter XVIII.-Concerning Sacrifices and Oblations, and Those Who Truly Offer Them.
4. Inasmuch, then, as the Church offers with single-mindedness, her gift is justly reckoned a pure sacrifice with God. As Paul also says to the Philippians, "I am full, having received from Epaphroditus the things that were sent from you, the odour of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, pleasing to God."250 For it behoves us to make an oblation to God, and in all things to be found grateful to God our Maker, in a pure mind, and in faith without hypocrisy, in well-grounded hope, in fervent love, offering the first-fruits of His own created things. And the Church alone offers this pure oblation to the Creator, offering to Him, with giving of thanks, [the things taken] from His creation. But the Jews do not offer thus: for their hands are full of blood; for they have not received the Word, through whom it is offered to God.251 Nor, again, do any of the conventicles (synagogae) of the heretics [offer this]. For some, by maintaining that the Father is different from the Creator, do, when they offer to Him what belongs to this creation of ours, set Him forth as being covetous of another’s property, and desirous of what is not His own. Those, again, who maintain that the things around us originated from apostasy, ignorance, and passion, do, while offering unto Him the fruits of ignorance, passion, and apostasy, sin against their Father, rather subjecting Him to insult than giving Him thanks. But how can they be consistent with themselves, [when they say] that the bread over which thanks have been given is the body of their Lord,252 and the cup His blood, if they do not call Himself the Son of the Creator of the world, that is, His Word, through whom the wood fructifies, and the fountains gush forth, and the earth gives "first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear."253
biblefacts.org/ecf/vol1/anf01-62.htm#P7979_2198226%between%%between%

 

[jimmy]

Irenaeus Book 5. Against Heresies.
Chapter II.-When Christ Visited Us in His Grace, He Did Not Come to What Did Not Belong to Him: Also, by Shedding His True Blood for Us, and Exhibiting to Us His True Flesh in the Eucharist, He Conferred Upon Our Flesh the Capacity of Salvation.
2. But vain in every respect are they who despise the entire dispensation of God, and disallow the salvation of the flesh, and treat with contempt its regeneration, maintaining that it is not capable of incorruption. But if this indeed do not attain salvation, then neither did the Lord redeem us with His blood, nor is the cup of the Eucharist the communion of His blood, nor the bread which we break the communion of His body.10 For blood can only come from veins and flesh, and whatsoever else makes up the substance of man, such as the Word of God was actually made. By His own blood he redeemed us, as also His apostle declares, "In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the remission of sins."11 And as we are His members, we are also nourished by means of the creation (and He Himself grants the creation to us, for He causes His sun to rise, and sends rain when He wills12 ). He has acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as His own blood, from which He bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of the creation) He has established as His own body, from which He gives increase to our bodies.13 biblefacts.org/ecf/vol1/anf01-63.htm#P8900_2545577

 

[jimmy]

I could continue posting writtings of Cyril of Jerusalem, Chrysostom, Gregory of Nyssa, Tertullian, Cyprian, Hilary, and Ambrose, but I think that those first century writtings I already posted should be enough to show the early teachings of the church.

 

[SpiritualSon]

Britta:

I guess we’ve had it wrong for 2000 years.

Seems to me it takes more than our natural eyes and ears to see and believe that the bread and wine are His body and blood. It takes faith.

Britta,
Correspondences of the Word.
The Word has a spiritual sense in it,not just natural. By “a woman” in the internal sense of the Word, is meant the church, in the opposite sense, a profane religion.

Just as like in our world the spiritual world has a sun. The sun in our world corresponds to sun in the spiritual world. The sun in our world has heat and light, and it is natural. The sun in the spiritual world also has heat and light, and it is spiritual. The natural sun will die one day, but the spiritual sun will not. The spiritual sun will continue forever. The heat from the spiritual sun is love, good and charity,and its light is truth, faith,understanding. It shines into minds of the angels,and warms their heart,and into their understanding, and also into the heart and minds of men on earth whose mind has been open by the Lord, so that the spiritual sun can penetrate far enough into the mind and cause the person to see that more one Divine Essence is impossible.

The sun in our world correspondences to charity and faith in the spring. It correspondences to faith without charity in winter. Faith without charity and good works is cold, just like in the winter.

It is not the sun in the natural world that turns cold in winter. It is the earth that does its thing and turns cold. There is a correspondences to the changes of the earth throught the seasons. These are called changes of state in man.

If he is in faith alone without charity and good works, than his state of mind is cold like the winter. If he is in faith and charity,than his spirit is like springtime.

light combined with heat, which means faith with charity, makes the trees grow, putting forth first leaves, then flowers, and finally fruits.

It opens up and softens the ground, to bring forth grass, plants, flowers and shrubs, and it also melts the ice so that water flows from springs. The sun controls the earth, just like the Divine in the Lord called the Father controls the Human in Jesus Christ. Jesus said the Father is greater than I.

Harry

 

[Kinsman]

jimmy:

So, you believe that 2000 years worth of theologians, apostles, and saints are wrong, yet you are correct with your new interpretation. That is pretty arrogant. You can have your new translation, I will take that of the apostles and early fathers of the church.

I’m not presenting a “new translation.” Mine is an “interpretation.” Also, none of the Apostles taught transubstantiation. Can you show me in Scripture where Peter taught such a doctrine? In his first Epistle to the Corinthians, the Apostle Paul conveyed to the Corinthians the reason Christ instituted the “Lord’s Supper”:

“For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes."" (1 Cor. 11:23-26)

Paul’s first letter to the Corinthian church was written about 55 A.D., some 20 years after Jesus instituted the “Lord’s Supper.” Notice in the above quote that Paul retains the physical elements of both the bread and the cup. And the symbolic ritual, he explains, *is not done for the sake of obtaining eternal life, as Jesus taught in John chapter six *(6:54, a teaching that would even exceed Roman Catholic doctrine), but it is to be done “in remembrance” of Him and *the proclamation of His death *(in respect to the New Covenant) until He comes.

Christ as the Bread of life that came down out of heaven does not find its significance, nor its fulfillment, in looking forward to the institution of the Lord’s Supper (as stated above, John does not record the words of Christ instituting this “sacrament”), but in looking backward to the first chapter of John’s Gospel account where it is written, “and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.”

This was another way of saying that when Christ came into the world God created a whole new humanity, grafted on to the old by a miraculous conception through the virgin birth. The Apostle Paul sheds more light on this truth in his teaching that through the miracle of the incarnation God the Son became a new “Federal Head,” the “second Man” (1 Cor. 15:47), the “Last Adam” (1 Cor. 15:45; cf Rom. 5:12-21), for the divine purpose that all men born spiritually dead in Adam may through faith in the “Last Adam,” Jesus Christ, be “born again” and *His resurrected life *(not crucified body) *be transferred to them at the time of personal belief *(Jn. 3:3:3;16-18;34-36; 5:21,24,26,40; 6:29,35,40,47,51,63).

“So also it is written, “the first man, Adam, became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit” (1 Cor. 15:45)

John chapter six is about the LIFE of Christ, not the death of Christ.

 

[Kinsman]

Britta:

I guess we’ve had it wrong for 2000 years.

Seems to me it takes more than our natural eyes and ears to see and believe that the bread and wine are His body and blood. It takes faith.

“Faith” is not what is in question here. Either the bread is literally transformed into the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ by the power of priestcraft, or it is not. The idea of the “mass” being an “unbloody sacrifice,” the “re-presentation” of the sacrifice of Christ, is a time-developed doctrine. But this is not what John chapter six is about. It’s about the LIFE of Christ being transferred to the believer. Read chapters five and six again.

 

[SpiritualSon]

**

A knowledge of correspondences allows us to know what is meant by the Lord’s flesh and blood, much the same as by bread and wine. The Lord’s flesh and the bread mean the Divine Good of His love and also all the good of charity.The Lord’s blood and the wine mean the Divine Truth of His wisdom and also all the truth of faith. Eating means making one’s own.

Harry

**

 

[Kinsman]

The figurative tone of Christ’s words in John six is made obvious when He states: “I am the bread of life.” Surely He was not calling Himself a loaf of bread (I suppose today’s theologian would argue that He’s whole wheat since it is better for you than white - just a little humor folks).

When Jesus says He is the "Bread" of life it is no different than when He figuratively stated: “I am the Door; if anyone enters through Me, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture” (Jn. 10:9). Obviously He’s not a literal door that we can pass through, and we’re not grazing sheep. And elsewhere, "Again therefore Jesus spoke to them, saying, *“I am the light of the world; he who follows Me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life” *(Jn. 8:12). I’m sure none of you have any problem interpreting these passages figuratively. None of you think Jesus is a literal door or some cosmic flashlight. But the truth illustrated by these non-literal designations are used by Christ to uniquely illustrate who He is and what He came to accomplish through His death, burial and bodily resurrection.

 

[Kinsman]

That John chapter six is not related at all to the words of Christ instituting the “Lord’s Supper” is very evident when examining the two acconts:

1. John makes no indication anywhere in his Gospel account that the words Jesus spoke at Capernaum, in chapter six, were in anticipation of what He would institute at the Last Supper. Nor does Jesus indicate in any way that the institution of the “Lord’s Supper” is the fulfillment of what He spoke at Capernaum.

2. Significantly, the words Jesus spoke in the upper room instituting the “Lord’s Supper” are recorded in each of the Gospel accounts except John’s. The Apostle John omits Christ’s words completely! Significantly, as well, neither Matthew, Mark or Luke include in their Gospel accounts the Capernaum incident John records in his sixth chapter. A clear indication that neither the Apostle John nor the other Gospel writers directly associated Christ’s words, spoken to the unbelieving multitude at Capernaum, with those spoken to His disciples when instituting the Lord’s Supper.

3. The words Jesus spoke in John chapter six were spoken to unbelievers, not believers. “Eat My flesh” and “drink My blood,” in context, was analogous to an unbeliever coming to Him by faith to satisfy spiritual hunger and believing in Him to quench spiritual thirst - resulting in receiving “eternal life” (Jn. 6:35-36; 52-58). However, in direct contrast, eating the bread and drinking of the cup at the Last Supper was a ritual instituted by the Lord for those who had already believed and were already His. The Apostle Paul taught that the purpose of partaking in the “Lord’s Supper” was a memorial for believers and a proclamation of His sacrificial death until He comes; not for the purpose of obtaining eternal life, which was already theirs through faith in Christ (compare Jn. 6:58 with 1 Cor. 11:26).

4. The bread and cup at the Last Supper anticipated the sacrificial death of Christ on the cross and the forgiveness of sins through the inauguration of the New Covenant in His blood (Matt. 26:28). In contrast, John chapter six makes no mention of the New Covenant or the forgiveness of sins through the sacrifice of Himself, but emphasizes coming to Him and believing unto eternal life. He alludes to His future sacrificial death in verse 51 only because it is through this selfless act that His resurrected life (eternal life) will be transferred to those who come to Him by faith.

5. Jesus does not reiterate the words, “eat My flesh and drink My blood” when speaking to His disciples in the upper room. But rather He told them that the bread represented His body which was to be given for them (the crucifixion), and the cup represented the new covenant to be inaugurated at the cross by the shedding of His blood (Lk. 22:19-20). Contrary to Rome’s teaching in its catechism (# 1336), Christ did not say in the upper room, “eat this and drink this that you may receive Me,” but “do this in remembrance of Me.” Both John chapter six and the upper room discourse are devoid of the notion that Jesus is received through physically eating and drinking Him. A bizarre concept that defies even simple logic and common sense. Jesus Himself asks the obvious:

“Do you not understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and is eliminated?” (Matt. 15:17).

Throuhout the Scriptures Christ is received when an unbeliever turns from His unbelief and believes in Him (the meaning of “repentance”). Never by actually eating Him!

 

[ncgolf]

To Kinsman,

Then why did Jesus so forcefully state that one should “eat” his body and “drink” His blood. He says my flesh is true food and my blood true drink. I see nothing in Jesus’s words or actions to lead me to say He was speaking figuartively. Many disciples left because they could not believe what He was saying … many must have thought it was rather distasteful. If His statements were mere symbolic then those who were with Him probably would not of had a problem with His statements.

I do not find disciples leaving Jesus because He said he was a door. None of the gospels say … How can we believe this man who says he is a door, but John 6 does say many disciples left him after He says to eat my body and drink my blood. Those who heard Jesus in John 6 knew he was speaking literally.

The verse "Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?” Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them, "Does this shock you? " gives another clue about the literal meaning of His words. His statements are hard to accept, they are not easy.

Peter states … “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.” I like this line because Peter did not fully understand the discourse either but still chose to follow Jesus. That is faith.

 

[Strider]

Kinsman:

That John chapter six is not related at all to the words of Christ instituting the “Lord’s Supper” is very evident when examining the two acconts:

.

. The Apostle Paul taught that the purpose of partaking in the “Lord’s Supper” was a memorial for believers and a proclamation of His sacrificial death until He comes; not for the purpose of obtaining eternal life, which was already theirs through faith in Christ (compare Jn. 6:58 with 1 Cor. 11:26).

5. Jesus does not reiterate the words, “eat My flesh and drink My blood” when speaking to His disciples in the upper room. But rather He told them that the bread represented His body which was to be given for them (the crucifixion), and the cup represented the new covenant to be inaugurated at the cross by the shedding of His blood (Lk. 22:19-20). Contrary to Rome’s teaching in its catechism (# 1336), Christ did not say in the upper room, “eat this and drink this that you may receive Me,” but “do this in remembrance of Me.” Both John chapter six and the upper room discourse are devoid of the notion that Jesus is received through physically eating and drinking Him. A bizarre concept that defies even simple logic and common sense. Jesus Himself asks the obvious:

Why stop at verse 26? 1 Cor 11:27 conitnues" Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaining the body and blood of the Lord. Verse 29 continues: For any one who EATS AND DRINKS without discerning the body eats and drinks judgement upon himself. (Emphasis mine)
Sounds like real eating and real drinking to me.

In the same chapter and verse of Luke, Jesus also says, holding up some bread, “This is my body, which will be given for you.”
Sounds an awful lot like John 6:55 "For my flesh is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed.
The references between John 6 and the Last Supper Consecrations are obvious if you have eyes to see.

I looked and looked, but I couldn’t find all the little parenthetical comments in John 6 that are in your previous post (a little humor, there.)

I have just one last question: By what authority do you “interpret” John 6 as you do?

 

[Charles]

Strider:

Why stop at verse 26? 1 Cor 11:27 conitnues" Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaining the body and blood of the Lord. Verse 29 continues: For any one who EATS AND DRINKS without discerning the body eats and drinks judgement upon himself. (Emphasis mine)
Sounds like real eating and real drinking to me.

Yes, I know of no way I can sin against bread and wine. Sins are against God. This is clearly a Eucharistic reference.

Probably already been mentioned but I’m new on this thread so here goes anyway. If the disciples who left Jesus just misunderstood his meaning then show me another place in the Gospels where Jesus let his disciples walk away from him over a misunderstanding. He got frustrated with the misunderstandings, but I don’t recall Him ever letting His followers leave Him over it. In fact He seems pretty patient in trying to explain things so they’d understand what he meant.

 

[Britta]

“Faith” is not what is in question here. Either the bread is literally transformed into the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ by the power of priestcraft, or it is not.

It is not “priestcraft” but completely established by God Himself.

The idea of the “mass” being an “unbloody sacrifice,” the “re-presentation” of the sacrifice of Christ, is a time-developed doctrine.

History shows that the early church believed this from the very start.

But this is not what John chapter six is about. It’s about the LIFE of Christ being transferred to the believer. Read chapters five and six again.

John is one of my favorite books of the bible. I’ve read it many times. Jesus is establishing his divinity “for the son can do nothing on his own” (John 5:19) He shows that He does nothing on His own but only through the Father. It is not His will but Thy will be done.

He continues to show “I have a testimony greater than Johns. The works that the Father has given me is complete…” (John 5:36) But they don’t believe or have faith. Jesus says “you do not have his word abiding in you, because you do not believe him whom he has sent. You search the scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that testify on my behalf” (John 5:38-39) Much like the Pharisees, they knew scripture but did not** know** God. “Yet you refuse to come to have eternal life” (refusing the Eucharist) (John 5:40). It is about seeking the “glory that comes from the one who alone is God” (John 5:44), not from Moses or even from the scriptures, but from Jesus alone!!!

Then Jesus goes on to feed thousands in John 6:1-15; He walks on water John 6:16-21; and establishes that He is the bread of life. He tells us not to “work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures for eternal life” (John 6:27) He tells us what we must do - we must “believe in him whom he has sent” (John 6:29)

Then they ask what sign He was going to give so that they would believe. They asked for a sign for “our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness” (John 6:31) but Jesus again tells how it was not Moses that provided the manna but God, and that God now is providing the true bread from heaven. It ties completely into John 5. ** Jesus **is “the bread from God which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world” (John 6:33). “I am the bread of life” (John 6:35) not the sciptures, not Divine Goodness, not Divine Truth, and not symbolically.

“Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life” (John 6:54) “so whoever eats me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.” (John 6:56-58)

“I am the bread,” “This** is** my body,” This** is** my blood"

Doesn’t get much clearer than that.

 

[gusano]

This is an awesome thread !
$.02 that I would like to add;
Have you PASSED THROUGH
( ) the Red Sea (parted)
( ) the desert
( ) the River Jordan (parted)
( ) The Christ…? (parted ) with a lance
Which one of these is the BIGGEST parting…think about it.

when God parted the River Jordan some of the water went down stream and some stayed upstream. and the Israelites PASSED THROUGH on dry ground.

When Jesus in His death was pierced with a lance, part of His Heart went left and the other half went right.
and THROUGH THAT PARTING you and I pass into that "other world…“After all, you have died ! your new life is hidden with Christ in God.”(Col. 3:3)

When we “Lift up our Hearts” at the Altar…we are taken INTO HIS DEATH.(into His offering.)

To separate the Blood from the Body results in death.
“Every time we eat THIS BREAD and DRINK THIS CUP we proclaim His death until He Comes.”

entering INTO the Eucharist is BIGGER than entering into the parted Red Sea !

We receive His Flesh…then We receive His Blood, (separated)
and both COME TOGETHER IN US !!!

When Jesus died and was pierced, he had no more blood, He offered all THAT BLOOD to the Father in ATONEMENT .
but The Blood which He drank the night before was still in His belly. …the SAME BLOOD WHICH WE DRINK TODAY.

“With out the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.”

We cannot go to Golgotha today to GET some of THAT Blood, it is no longer there and it was NOT OFFERED TO US, anyway.

The BLOOD OFFERED TO US and the FLESH OFFERED TO US is the same as what He himself ate and drank.

“In His Body he carries away our sins.”…which He gives us to eat.

…“All of you must drink from it …This is my Blood…poured out on behalf of many for the FORGIVENESS OF SINS.”

The most important part of all Christianity is THAT OUR SINS ARE FORGIVEN. …and HOW they are forgiven… let us not waltz over this awesome Gift lightly.

the sad part is that many presume that because Christ died historically 2000 yrs. ago , 11,000 miles away , our sins are forgiven.
(that is WHEN HE SET IN PLACE… The Fountain of all Holiness.")…now the FOUNTAIN is embedded in our ALTARS.

THE CUP WE DRINK is distributed for the FORGIVENESS of our sins.
“Do you not suppose that a much worse punishment is due the man who disdains The Son of God, thinks the Covenant-Blood by which he was sanctified to be ordinary, and insults the Spirit of grace?” (Heb. 10:29)

…“He will have to carry the guilt of his sin for all eternity.” (Mk. 3:29)

“Wherefore we who are receiving the unshakeable kingdom should hold fast to Gods grace, through which we may offer acceptable worship to him in reverance and in awe. For our God is a consuming fire !” (Heb. 12:28)

gusano

 

[Kinsman]

Strider:

Why stop at verse 26? 1 Cor 11:27 conitnues" Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaining the body and blood of the Lord. Verse 29 continues: For any one who EATS AND DRINKS without discerning the body eats and drinks judgement upon himself. (Emphasis mine)
Sounds like real eating and real drinking to me.

In the same chapter and verse of Luke, Jesus also says, holding up some bread, “This is my body, which will be given for you.”
Sounds an awful lot like John 6:55 "For my flesh is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed.
The references between John 6 and the Last Supper Consecrations are obvious if you have eyes to see.

Paul states in 1 Cor. 11:26, *“For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.” *Notice with your eyes that he specifically says, *“eat the bread,” *and "drink the cup." He does not say eat His flesh and drink His blood. "But let a man examine Himself, so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks (this is in direct reference of the “bread” and “cup”) eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he does not judge the body rightly" (vs. 29).

In verse 27 he specifically says that he who, *“eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord” *in an unworthy manner is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord because they are making lite of His once for all sacrificial death which the bread and cup represent. This ritual they were to do in REMEMBRANCE of Him (vss. 24 &25). You dishonor His self-less sacrifice for our sins and the New Covenant established in His blood when you eat the bread and drink the cup in an unworthy manner.

Paul does not teach nor even hint to the doctrine of transubstantiation in this 1 Cor. passage.

In the Luke passage Jesus breaks bread, hands it to His disciples and says, while in His body, (obviously speaking figuratively), *“this is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” *Do what in remembrance of Him? Eat the bread. He does not say “this will become My body.” Nor of the cup, “this will become My blood.” None of the Apostles took His words “this is My body” literally, not even Paul in the 1 Cor. passage. It was obvious to them He was speaking figuratively, as it should be to you. For this reason you do not see the doctrine of transubstantiation taught in the Epistles.

What was said in the upper room to His disciples was VERY different from what He said to the unbelieving crowd in Jn. 6. *"Truly, truly I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. *A whole different context. A whole different meaning.

I have just one last question: By what authority do you “interpret” John 6 as you do?

By the authority that God has given me the ability to read, and common sense to comprehend simple language. It is my personal responsibity as a believer in Christ Jesus to study God’s magnificent Word.

 

[gusano]

tiation

Kinsman:

Paul states in 1 Cor. 11:26, "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes."

Paul does not teach nor even hint to the doctrine of transubstantiation in this 1 Cor. passage.

In the Luke passage Jesus breaks bread, hands it to His disciples and says, while in His body, (obviously speaking figuratively), "this is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me." Do what in remembrance of Him? Eat the bread. He does not say “this will become My body.” Nor of the cup, “this will become My blood.” None of the Apostles took His words “this is My body” literally, not even Paul in the 1 Cor. passage. It was obvious to them He was speaking figuratively, as it should be to you.

For this reason you do not see the doctrine of transubstantiation taught in the Epistles.

What was said in the upper room to His disciples was VERY different from what He said to the unbelieving crowd in Jn. 6. "Truly, truly I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. A whole different context. A whole different meaning.By the authority that God has given me the ability to read, and common sense to comprehend simple language. It is my personal responsibity as a believer in Christ Jesus to study God’s magnificent Word.

Jesus DID Transubstantiation in Mat. 26:26-28…read it yourself; “He took BREAD, BLESSED it, broke it and gave it to his disciples…”

BREAD + BLESSING = HIS BODY…Can you deny that or can you believe that ?..Which ?

THE CUP + THANKS = HIS BLOOD…can you deny that…or BELIEVE IT…which ?

ONE THING I see that you are are foregetting in describing your authority to study the Word of God…(which is the same mistake the Jehovah’s witnesses make ) and that is;

GOD’S REVELATION…

see Matt 11;25 concerning REVELATION.

ability to read and all the common sense and all the logic in the world are not enough to enter The Kingdom of God.

“NO ONE CAN COME TO ME UNLESS THE FATHER DRAWS HIM…”

gusano