Literal or Symbolic?...

  • Thread starter Thread starter The_GreyPilgrim
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
david_ruiz said:
Thanks.Good info .Catholics do have some OT rationale -don’t remember it(Mal1), but something about a sacrifice to be forever offered and a re-presenting of himself ,they even used a Jewish term for it .Maybe they’ll bring it up.Thanks again
Click to expand...
Yes. It’s Malachi 1:11.

No Protestant church seems to fulfill this prophecy.

[BIBLEDRB]Malachi 1:11[/BIBLEDRB]
 
benedictus2 said:
One could also say: if God really wanted His disciples to know that God is a Trinity and that there is such a thing as hypostatic union, why didn’t He just say so?

Actually, while we’re at it, why didn’t He just write a book and be done with it? What’s all the business with the Church?
Click to expand...
'zactly. 👍

The answer is that He told us, “He who hears you, hears Me.” And when the Church speaks it is indeed Christ who speaks to us.

One cannot use only Scripture to distill the teachings on the the Trinity, the Hypostatic Union–one needs the Church.

Which is why JWs and Christadelphians and Mormons, who have divorced themselves from this Church, use Scripture alone to come to the conclusion that God is not trinitarian and Jesus is not True God and True Man.
 
david_ruiz said:
WWhat about the Crucifix ,a symbol by Catholic decree,I think.?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is a symbol. And no Catholic ought to believe that the crucifix that hangs above their bed will save them.

No Catholic ought to profess that a symbol saved them. 🤷
 
The_GreyPilgrim said:
Since I really got no answer to this question on the other thread I’m going to ask it here:

Did Jesus give His literal flesh or symbolic flesh for the life of the world?

Literal or symbolic?
Click to expand...
So let me see. Jesus was the God/man. He was born of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Really was human. Jesus was man in all ways except sin. He talked to the Pharisees and they talked back. He did all these miracles that everyone believes, including the multiplying of loaves before He asked us to gnaw His flesh. Jesus carried a real cross. Jesus was nailed to a real cross. Jesus bled, his side was pierced. His dead body was buried. He was resurrected and someone put their hand into his wounds to prove it was really Him.

Catholics, Orthodox believe that it was literal. I hear all these Protestants on TV, all the Harvest crusade guys, TBN, Greg Laurie, Luther, Calvin, Knox, Zwingli…Benny Hinn say that He really physically died for me.

I’m going to go with Literal. The symbolic just does not jump out at me.🤷
 
Sufjon said:
While I think that both the literal or figurative interpretations each hold some truth, I think both are rather limited or primitive understandings. But let’s go ahead and go with the literal interpretation. I have a question that has intrigued me for a long time, and I am dead serious, although you might not take it that way. Regardless, it’s something I want to know. So, you are eating the Body of Christ and drinking the Blood of Christ. Now, if I am a Christian, this is perhaps among the most sacred of things. Not something to be trivial with. Now, in regard to what we eat and drink, we know that some of it is used to build cells that become part of us, but even this is only temporary because our bodies change out all of their cells and particles over time. Eventually it is all shed or expelled in one way or another. Since you are very interested in exacting understandings of things, I have always wondered about this and would like to know if there is some theory in the case of the Body and Blood of Christ that circumvents the natural bodily processes in regards to what it eats. Is there some point before a cell is shed or food is expelled that it is no longer the Body and Blood of Christ? Is there some point before this happens when the “Christness” in it leaves? Every cell in our bodies eventually gets tossed out in some way or another eventually, and becomes a part of other things like plants and dogs and what have you. It’s a serious question – one that I have often wondered about, so I am hoping that I can get a serious answer. I am asking you in particular because you seem to have a penchant for having a very precise understanding of things, and I thought perhaps you could help me here. We are talking about eating an actual physical body, so how does this jibe with other actual physical things we eat? I am not denying that it’s real and physical or any of the things you hold dear. I just want to know what happens to it after it’s no longer a component of my fingernail, and becomes part of another animal or something. It’s probably crossed a lot of people’s minds, but I wonder how many have asked.

Does it somehow adhere to us like nothing else we eat, and therefore if I were to receive the Eucharist every day for 70 years, all the particles in my body get changed out eventually for Jesus particles, and hence my body literally becomes 100% the Body of Christ, (in which case you should be respectful in how you answer my question). Or do they get expelled like everything else and get swam in by fish, absorbed by plants and soil and become part of other living things, or does the Jesus fly out of them at some point before all t hat can happen? Is there a doctrine on that?

Of course, I know that Jesus actually had a much larger and mystical meaning in saying “this is my body” and “this is my blood,” than what this discussion you have started gives it credit for, but since we are crawling around on the bestial floor of possible understandings, we are accordingly left with all the beastly details to reckon with here, are we not?

Your friend
Sufjon
Click to expand...
It is the spirit that gives life. The Eucharist is body/spirit. It is the mode of delivery. The body dissolves and the spirit remains. How long the spirit remains is a matter of discussion concerning sin. Frequent communion is an antidote to sin:thumbsup:
 
stthomas said:
david ruiz;8377435:
Is this another Protestant doctrine that tries to explain the Real Presence? The problem that I see here is that David has given himself the authority to interpret Holy Scriptures and decided that he knows what Jesus really meant. So should we throw out 1500 years of Eucharistic celebration? I think not, Jesus did not establish a symbolic new covenant on Holy Thursday with grape juice and crackers. I would like to point out the last sentence of this quote: “Live by every word out of the mouth of Jesus”. I agree, but why dont you accept and believe what He says?
Click to expand...
Scriptre and verse please that says to “eat his flesh” is transubstantiation.?
Click to expand...
 
PRmerger said:
Yes. It’s Malachi 1:11.

No Protestant church seems to fulfill this prophecy.

[BIBLEDRB]Malachi 1:11[/BIBLEDRB]
Click to expand...
Don’t have my notes in front of me,but several church fathers said the sacrifice is one of thanksgiving. Can we really offer up anything else (ecf) ? And the Father gave ,offered His Son to us,not vice-versa. Protetstants definitely Eucharist (give thanksgiving).Eucharist is Greek for thanksgiving ,not transubstantiation,a 12th century term/decree.
 
CopticChristian said:
So let me see. Jesus was the God/man. He was born of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Really was human. Jesus was man in all ways except sin. He talked to the Pharisees and they talked back. He did all these miracles that everyone believes, including the multiplying of loaves before He asked us to gnaw His flesh. Jesus carried a real cross. Jesus was nailed to a real cross. Jesus bled, his side was pierced. His dead body was buried. He was resurrected and someone put their hand into his wounds to prove it was really Him.

Catholics, Orthodox believe that it was literal. I hear all these Protestants on TV, all the Harvest crusade guys, TBN, Greg Laurie, Luther, Calvin, Knox, Zwingli…Benny Hinn say that He really physically died for me.

I’m going to go with Literal. The symbolic just does not jump out at me.🤷
Click to expand...
His incarnation ,death and resurection indeed were literal and he was fully man fully God .We are just debating whether you literally have to eat his flesh to be saved .Think about it .Eat his flesh .That is the good news ? "Repent eveyone, believe ,be baptized ,confirmed ,confess and eat his flesh -the gospel according to whom ? It has been well presented that eating his flesh may be without your “teeth and bellies” ,as presented by St.Augustine. Figurative man,figurative.
 
david_ruiz said:
His incarnation ,death and resurection indeed were literal and he was fully man fully God .We are just debating whether you literally have to eat his flesh to be saved .Think about it .Eat his flesh .That is the good news ? "Repent eveyone, believe ,be baptized ,confirmed ,confess and eat his flesh -the gospel according to whom ? It has been well presented that eating his flesh may be without your “teeth and bellies” ,as presented by St.Augustine. Figurative man,figurative.
Click to expand...
You know the story, lots of guys left when he said that. Wonder where they went?
 
david_ruiz said:
Scripture and verse please. I do believe this is nice, but man-made.There are just as many sinners in Rp churches as there are non-RP. The proof is in the pudding.
Click to expand...
Why must you measure the Church by sin. Measure the glory and the Saints. Parallell the Protestant version of the Saints in the Church, take your time.😊
 
david_ruiz said:
Scripture and verse please. I do believe this is nice, but man-made.There are just as many sinners in Rp churches as there are non-RP. The proof is in the pudding.
Click to expand...
Man-made? Like ALL Protestant churches founded by mere men with no such authority from Christ or the Apostles? Scripture and verse please?
 
david_ruiz said:
Don’t have my notes in front of me,but several church fathers said the sacrifice is one of thanksgiving. Can we really offer up anything else (ecf) ?
Click to expand...
Amen! This is very Catholic of you to say, david!
And the Father gave ,offered His Son to us,not vice-versa.
Click to expand...
Christ was not an offering to the Father?

He was not the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world? :confused:
Protetstants definitely Eucharist (give thanksgiving).Eucharist is Greek for thanksgiving ,not transubstantiation,a 12th century term/decree.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Eucharist *is *Greek for thanksgiving!

Eucharist and transubstantiation are not synonymous, anymore than Jesus and the Incarnation are synonymous. That is, we would not say, “The Incarnation suffered and died for our sins.” Or “The Incarnation walked on water.”
 
david_ruiz said:
I do not think this is quite the same as RP .RP is figurative or literally spiritualy discerned .**The “how” is spiritually discerned, that is the Holy Spirit conceived her. **You can’t see that , just like you can’t see me eat His flesh spiritually. You can see the effects ,a bloated stomach and eventual baby ,and a changed life,bearing spiritual fruit.
Click to expand...
You totally misunderstand the Spirit being revealed in spiritual realities described in spiritual terms. I am sad to say here david your carnal understanding of the scripture in spiritual realities have left the building. Please allow me to try and clarify once again;

There is nothing “figurative” in the incarnation nor the Eucharist. The “HOW” you pretend to be figuratively and discerned from one pretending that the “spirit” is symbolic contradicts the following scripture that reveals the “HOW” by “will come upon you” and the “power of the most high will overshadow you”.

Luke 2:34But Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?”* 35And the angel said to her in reply, “The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.

Now taking this revelation of “HOW” the real Spirit works because God does not change. In the beginning God (the Father) spoke His Word (Jesus Word of God incarnate) that the Spirit (Holy Spirit) created, when God revealed "Let US make man in OUR Image;

According to your symbolic spirit, it cannot create and you divided up the blessed Trinity by putting your “symbolic spiritual discerment” to replace the Word of God which speaks those things which do not exist into existance.

Your spiritual figurement divides the God head, working independent from the Father and the Son when “ALL” three are one indivisible Godhead. I find your belief in a symbolic spirit or figurative discernment of God’s Word replacing the True Spirit of God from working the Eucharistic miracle by changing the bread and wine into the body, blood soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. Here is Jesus;

Luke 22:19 Then he took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which will be given for you; do this in memory of me.” 20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you…

Jesus earlier revealed to His doubting disciples the “How this will be done”, when it is the Spirit that gives life to these, while the flesh is of no avail.

John 6:63 *It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life. **

According to your symbolic figurative Jesus, you believe that the “Spirit” does not have the power to give life? because you hold that your flesh can only discern that the “Spirit” figuratively reveals to your “figurative spirit” that the bread and wine remain just bread and wine and never the True Lamb of God, when Jesus states CLEARLY “This is my body”, “This is my blood”.

According to Jesus the bread and wine have Transubstantiated into, “This is my body, This is my blood”, when Jesus presented the bread and wine after He gave thanks and the blessing.

Here is another scripture revealing “Transubstantiation” without using the term. Remember Trans. is not revealing any mystery only that a change takes place in the “True Substance of bread and wine”. Trans. never means to “Eat my flesh” as you wrongly implied earlier this is never a Catholic Teaching. Please be careful how define Catholic terms.

Here is something that protestants and undiscerning catholics need to learn about Catholic teachings;

Hint, the True substance of bread and wine and any other creation was brought into existence from its author and creator “The Word of God himself” This “substance change” is what protestants and you “david” need to ponder when the Catholic Church describes from Transubstantiation that the “True substance” from which bread and wine were created from and returns or transubstantiates back into the “Word of God”, “FOR GOD’S WORD NEVER RETURNS VOID.” ** Isaiah 55:Giving seed to the one who sows

and bread to the one who eats,

11So shall my word be

that goes forth from my mouth;

It shall not return to me empty,

but shall do what pleases me,

achieving the end for which I sent it.**

When Jesus speaks to the bread and wine, “This is my body, This is my blood”.

Luke 24:30 And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them. 31With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight. 33So they set out at once and returned to Jerusalem where they found gathered together the eleven and those with them 34who were saying, “The Lord has truly been raised and has appeared to Simon!”q **35Then the two recounted what had taken place on the way and how he was made known to them in the breaking of the bread. **

45Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures.

Did Jesus open your mind “david” to understand the scriptures or did Jesus reveal this to His Church?
 
CopticChristian said:
Why must you measure the Church by sin. Measure the glory and the Saints. Parallell the Protestant version of the Saints in the Church, take your time.😊
Click to expand...
We could ,but you said frequent communion is an anti dote to sin.You did not say frequent communion leads to sainthood.
 
david_ruiz said:
Actually those that left believed more in the literal interpretation, somewhat as yourself.
Click to expand...
'zactly! They left Jesus because they understood him to be speaking something that was “difficult”.

So, too, do Protestants, as they reject Jesus’ words as being distasteful, so they decide to edit Jesus’ words to something more palatable.

There is no question that those who left understood him to be speaking literally.
 
Nicea325 said:
Man-made? Like ALL Protestant churches founded by mere men with no such authority from Christ or the Apostles? Scripture and verse please?
Click to expand...
That.s right .All men are sinners ,liars ,off the mark but “Let God be true”.
 
david_ruiz said:
Yes catholic as in universal .Therefore all Christian churches fulfill malachi 1.,with there is continual sacrifice of thanksgiving, with there obedience to Remembrance.
Click to expand...
When does your church offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving? And how is this different from a prayer of thanksgiving?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top