John 3:6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.Yes yea but…why are we to choose that when Jesus was talking about death it is only figuratively and that eating His flesh is very much meant literally???l.
…
Well, that’s one very good argument for why He left us the Church, with its lineage of teachings stretching back to the beginning. There is simply no way that a person can pick up the bible centuries after the fact and have full, clear understanding of what it means to say. Heck, it was never intended to serve as a catechism to begin with. But the Church has continuously taught what she received and proclaimed before a word of the New Testament was written.This is why I find the Bible a bit problematic. I am supposed to understand the language used way back then. I am dont even know if I would ubdeestand how people spoke 200 yeara ago. We need commentaries whereas the Jews did not really need it. They already knew their own way of speaking. Jesus expects a person living ca 2000 years later to understand his way of speaking. It is a bit weird reading the NT without a commentary.
Why not juat have Jesus speaking to us in our way of speaking? Wouldnt that better.
What are we to think of this?
Eternal life or an afterlife was not a certain and agreed upon concept among the Jews. Jesus explained that eternal life was real, and later proved it by His resurrection.I m aware that we are suppposed to take John 48-51 literally.
48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
The problem is that Catholics who practice the faith in fact do die. Jesus said that those who ate the Man a died but people who went to Communion also died.
If Jesus really did mean that faithful Catholic wouldnt die why do the die???
Or do we get to choose which part of His message we want to understand litererally? Death is not to be understood literally but flesh?
Do I miss something about the Hebrew way of using both literally and figuratively in the same sentence or sentences?
I think you did not read far enough; Jesus knew people would die; he did say to Martha, “I am the resurrection and the life,” when we with our understanding see only Lazarus is dead - (is Jesus only speaking figuratively or spiritually or metaphorically about Lazarus?).I m aware that we are suppposed to take John 48-51 literally.
48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
The problem is that Catholics who practice the faith in fact do die. Jesus said that those who ate the Man a died but people who went to Communion also died.
If Jesus really did mean that faithful Catholic wouldnt die why do the die???
Or do we get to choose which part of His message we want to understand litererally? Death is not to be understood literally but flesh?
Do I miss something about the Hebrew way of using both literally and figuratively in the same sentence or sentences?
I will die, but I intend to tell you right before I die that I am not about to die. And I will tell you that just like the Angel of the Lord avoided killing the firstborn in Egypt because he saw literal lamb’s blood on the doorposts and saw literal lamb’s flesh in the stomachs of the Israelites, in like manner the Father will take note of the literal body and blood of Christ in me (and in you) in his eternal resurrection of his Son.At this, the Jews began to argue among themselves, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?”
So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man, you have no life in you.
Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
For My flesh is real food, and My blood is real drink"
I bolded the word for life: ζωὴν (zoen - this is “zoe” but with a case ending). In John 6, Jesus isn’t just speaking of bios. He’s not even speaking of psuche. He’s speaking of the sharing in the divine life, the true life, of God.53 εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς· Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ φάγητε τὴν σάρκα τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ πίητε αὐτοῦ τὸ αἷμα, οὐκ ἔχετε ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. 54 ὁ τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα καὶ πίνων μου τὸ αἷμα ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον, κἀγὼ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ.
You can see the root ζωῆ (zoe) and its variations (so instead of “life” you have variations for “living” in “zon” and “will live” in “zesei”). But they are all based on zoe and participation in the eternal life of God. Not just eternal bios or psuche.48 ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς· 49 οἱ πατέρες ὑμῶν ἔφαγον ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τὸ μάννα καὶ ἀπέθανον· 50 οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβαίνων ἵνα τις ἐξ αὐτοῦ φάγῃ καὶ μὴ ἀποθάνῃ·51 ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ζῶν ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς· ἐάν τις φάγῃ ἐκ τούτου τοῦ ἄρτου ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, καὶ ὁ ἄρτος δὲ ὃν ἐγὼ δώσω ἡ σάρξ μού ἐστιν ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ζωῆς.
Good point.I m aware that we are suppposed to take John 48-51 literally.
48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
The problem is that Catholics who practice the faith in fact do die. Jesus said that those who ate the Man a died but people who went to Communion also died.
If Jesus really did mean that faithful Catholic wouldnt die why do the die???
Or do we get to choose which part of His message we want to understand litererally? Death is not to be understood literally but flesh?
Do I miss something about the Hebrew way of using both literally and figuratively in the same sentence or sentences?