Many Protestants argue "How can this man give us his flesh to eat."

[brkn1]

Friend, my reaction was not to a perceived lack of sophistication. That’s something I can’t, and won’t, judge. My comment was on how the mindset that is necessary for a rigid adherence to sola scriptura can prevent a good person from seeing things that are in plain sight.

Peace.

You are correct about my being rigid and critical. It is what I consider an asset and sometimes a fault about myself. My bluntness can also get me into trouble at times. I am “unsophisticated” in many ways. Art was never a strong point for me, as my response proved.

Peace

 

[Ronald_E]

You are correct about my being rigid and critical. It is what I consider an asset and sometimes a fault about myself. My bluntness can also get me into trouble at times. I am “unsophisticated” in many ways. Art was never a strong point for me, as my response proved.

Peace

Brkn 1, You just demonstrated the beautiful gift of Humility which comes from God’s Love.
Thank you.

 

[brkn1]

I respectfully accept your reasoning, and opinion. You did not mention this opinion when you stated your remark about the painting as if it were in error. The picture does not reveal all that took place from what the bible describes including ST.John the beloved, resting his head on Jesus chest. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Peace be with you

There is beauty that people, such as myself, often overlook and take for granted. I might have some problem, while driving to work, that bothers me enough that I can not see and thank God for all of the beauty that surrounds me on a perfect day. It is a fault that I need to work on.

Peace

 

[brkn1]

I have said this discussion has been circular in nature and I may have conveyed the wrong thoughts. I will try in this post to put things in their proper order and perspective.

While the Lord’s supper had not yet been instituted, it was in the process of being instituted and this was our Lord’s introduction to the supper. We have said repeatedly, that our Lord said, “I AM the bread of life.”

I agree, you will not find the word transubstantiation in the Bible, just as you won’t find the word Trinity or Sola Scriptura that you believe in. Catholics believe that this process took place because the Lord declared it so, as confirmed in 3 different Gospels, describing the actual institution of the Lord’s supper. The Apostles believed Christ as they had already been given the introduction of this tradition. This point confirms the Lord giving authority to the Apostles, as they were the true believers in all things He taught them and this was Christ’s assurance this tradition would be passed on by true men of faith. In my opinion, He made sure the non-believers were not there so there would be no misinterpretation of the Eucharist causing wrongful teachings of the tradition.

The Lord did not once say, “This bread is like my body” or “This bread represents my body”. He plainly states, “This is my body”. He did this with man-made bread. To believe the Lord at his words, one has to believe the process described as transubstantiation has taken place.

This tradition was taught to Paul by the Apostles, and Paul instructed the Corinthian Church on the tradition.

Paul did not say they were partaking of bread respresenting the body of Christ. This is verified in verses, 10:16 as well as 11:27 and 29.

To hang on to one section of the Bible for agruments sake, is to ignore other parts or take a teaching out of context. If not this, then it seems to say there is contradiction in the Bible which we all deny as we all believe the Bible to be inerrant.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

The reason that I have been hanging on to John chapter 6 is that the words of Jesus saying, “I AM the living bread which came down from heaven…” has been used many times in this thread as an argument to explain that we must physically eat Jesus.

The problem with that argument is that by saying “which came down from heaven”, Jesus precludes any such idea of the “physical” body of Jesus.
Jesus did not come down from heaven as a physical baby. He was born of a Virgin on earth.
Jesus came down from heaven as a Spiritual Being and that is what we must feast on spiritually to be saved. Jesus explained that He was speaking spiritually in (John 6:63)

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The reason that I have been hanging on to John chapter 6 is that the words of Jesus saying, “I AM the living bread which came down from heaven…” has been used many times in this thread as an argument to explain that we must physically eat Jesus.

The problem with that argument is that by saying “which came down from heaven”, Jesus precludes any such idea of the “physical” body of Jesus.
Jesus did not come down from heaven as a physical baby. He was born of a Virgin on earth.
Jesus came down from heaven as a Spiritual Being and that is what we must feast on spiritually to be saved. Jesus explained that He was speaking spiritually in (John 6:63)

So you’re saying Paul got it wrong in 1 Corinthians and in the 3 Gospels I provided, Jesus didn’t mean it when he stated, “This is my body”? It doesn’t seem you’re willing to discuss the other 3 Gospels or 1 Corinthians for some reason.

Also, here’s a biblical explanation of John 6:63.

1Co 2:14 But the sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God. For it is foolishness to him: and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined.
1Co 2:15 But the spiritual man judgeth all things: and he himself is judged of no man.
1Co 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[ibkc]

Brkn1,

:hug3:

 

[anthony022071]

“Breaking of bread” is used, instead of “Eating of Jesus”, to describe what the RCC claims the Lord’s supper is. That does not support the RCC position at all.

The bread is broken,and it is eaten as Christ’s body.

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16).

From the Didache (a Syrian liturgical manual written around A.D. 70):
“On the Lord’s Day . . . gather together, break bread and offer the Eucharist, after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure. Let no one who has a quarrel with his neighbor join you until he is reconciled, lest our sacrifice be defiled. For this is that which was proclaimed by the Lord: ‘In every place and time let there be offered to me a clean sacrifice. For I am a great king,’ says the Lord, ‘and my name is wonderful among the gentiles’ [cf. Mal. 1:11]” (14:1–3).

Pope Clement:
“Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who blamelessly and holily have offered its sacrifices.”
(Letter to the Corinthians 44:4 [circa A.D. 80]).

Ignatius of Antioch:
“Make certain, therefore, that you all observe one common Eucharist; for there is but one Body of our Lord Jesus Christ, and but one cup of union with his Blood, and one single altar of sacrifice—even as there is also but one bishop, with his clergy and my own fellow servitors, the deacons. This will ensure that all your doings are in full accord with the will of God” (Letter to the Philadelphians 4 [A.D. 110]).

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Brkn1,

:hug3:

Ahhhh, ditto

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

The problem with that argument is that by saying “which came down from heaven”, Jesus precludes any such idea of the “physical” body of Jesus.
Jesus did not come down from heaven as a physical baby. He was born of a Virgin on earth.
Jesus came down from heaven as a Spiritual Being and that is what we must feast on spiritually to be saved. Jesus explained that He was speaking spiritually in (John 6:63)

brkn1, there is a lot going on here than meets the eye on the pages of scripture; For one Jesus is fully human and fully divine. If you can agree with that statement, then this topic can continue without running circles here. If you dont believe Jesus took on human flesh, and was fully human and fully God. Maybe we can help understand the spiritual realities of God from another perspective.

Jesus took on flesh (symbolic of the old creation, old covenant) In this old covenant one had to sacrifice a lamb for atonement for sins. Now only the high priest and his immediate family members were the only ones to partake of this sacrifice of the lamb to God (sharing a meal together with God). Now this is to be a PERPETUAL ORDINANCE TO FOLLOWED BY GOD’S CHOSEN. Perpetual means forever;,

Now Jesus buried this old flesh, or natural law, and raised it on sunday the 8th day (see lev.9, how God reveals himself and kills those who profane him on Sunday). Now God cannot change, but Jesus fulfilled the Law of God in his body and blood. Now we have a new high priest Jesus Christ. And when there is a change in Priesthood, there is renewed covenant with God and his people. Jesus our high priest according to the perpetual law of God of eating and drinking, pouring of libation of blood, has made a new and everlasting covenant as mediator between man and God.

Jesus Commands his children to eat his body, and drink his blood, which he is the perfect sacrificial lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world in the form of bread and wine. Only his immediate family members of his own body(Jesus christ our high priest in heaven), the Catholic church, and anyone else who wants to enter through baptism, can participate in this holy communion with God, by partaking of his body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, in the Eucharist which is truly his body and blood. Where we are promised eternal life, in the eternal everlasting sabbath rest in God, because God is all and in all. This cannot be, without consuming his flesh, drinking his blood, and being partakers of his divinity.

Peace be with you

 

[wisdomseeker]

uch: Oh, my goodness. Even the great masterpieces of art can’t escape the infinite legalism of the sola scripturalists. A detailed explanation of this painting can be found at this link.

i call this the great desire of proving that the CC is wrong. "anything please, anything!

**
'"" Put on the armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the Devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the Principalities and the Powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness on high. " (Eph 6:11-12)**

 

[FdeS2]

Very well put, Gabriel of 12!

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Very well put, Gabriel of 12!

Thanks. FdeS2, I reread the post, That must of been the holy Spirit who wrote that, I dont think I could repeat the thought that went into that description without getting a headache;

Peace be with you

 

[brkn1]

brkn1, there is a lot going on here than meets the eye on the pages of scripture; For one Jesus is fully human and fully divine. If you can agree with that statement, then this topic can continue without running circles here. If you dont believe Jesus took on human flesh, and was fully human and fully God. Maybe we can help understand the spiritual realities of God from another perspective.

Jesus took on flesh (symbolic of the old creation, old covenant) In this old covenant one had to sacrifice a lamb for atonement for sins. Now only the high priest and his immediate family members were the only ones to partake of this sacrifice of the lamb to God (sharing a meal together with God). Now this is to be a PERPETUAL ORDINANCE TO FOLLOWED BY GOD’S CHOSEN. Perpetual means forever;,

Now Jesus buried this old flesh, or natural law, and raised it on sunday the 8th day (see lev.9, how God reveals himself and kills those who profane him on Sunday). Now God cannot change, but Jesus fulfilled the Law of God in his body and blood. Now we have a new high priest Jesus Christ. And when there is a change in Priesthood, there is renewed covenant with God and his people. Jesus our high priest according to the perpetual law of God of eating and drinking, pouring of libation of blood, has made a new and everlasting covenant as mediator between man and God.

Jesus Commands his children to eat his body, and drink his blood, which he is the perfect sacrificial lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world in the form of bread and wine. Only his immediate family members of his own body(Jesus christ our high priest in heaven), the Catholic church, and anyone else who wants to enter through baptism, can participate in this holy communion with God, by partaking of his body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, in the Eucharist which is truly his body and blood. Where we are promised eternal life, in the eternal everlasting sabbath rest in God, because God is all and in all. This cannot be, without consuming his flesh, drinking his blood, and being partakers of his divinity.

Peace be with you

Jesus did not bring His flesh down from heaven. That means that He was not talking about His flesh as “bread which came down from heaven”. You did not really address that point.

There is another problem with the word eateth that Jesus used to describe “eateth” of this bread in (John 6:58).
That “eateth” means “gnaw, crunch, chew raw vegetables of fruits” as an animal would do in a continuing way.
The other word “eat” mana in the same verse is the normal eating or consuming of a meal as during a Passover feast.
The gnawing and crunching can not have a physical sense to it, since that would imply damage to bone. No bone was broken in Jesus’ one sacrifice on Calvary, so gnawing and crunching does not fit or make sense.
Exactly why would Jesus use that form of the word “eateth” if it was supposed to be talking about gnawing on His flesh as a meal? You don’t gnaw on flesh.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Jesus did not bring His flesh down from heaven. That means that He was not talking about His flesh as “bread which came down from heaven”. You did not really address that point.

**Jesus states he is the true bread that comes down from heaven. Remember; in the old testament “it rained manna from heaven”? And the Hebrews gathered up the substance and made cakes with it, ate it, but they all died, even though the bread rained from heaven.

When Jesus came down from heaven, He took on flesh. Not that Jesus came down from heaven with his flesh. The manna that rained down from heaven, became bread when it was gathered up on the earth. Same with Jesus, when he came down from heaven, he took on flesh.

Then Jesus being the Word of God made flesh. Spoke to the bread and said “This is my body” Now all of Christianity knows when ever the Word of God is spoken, God creates anew. When the Word of God made flesh speaks to the blood of grapes (wine) “This is my blood”, it is the blood of Jesus. Jesus states the words I speak are Spirit and the flesh profits nothing, for it is the Spirit that gives Life. The Eucharist is for the believer to journey in the desert from this life through death into eternal Life. This is the promise from God himself, for as the day of old, they ate the manna in the desert that rained down from heaven, but they all died. The flesh or the natural law covenant brought about death. The Spirit, the new and everlasting covenant built on better promises gives eternal life.**

There is another problem with the word eateth that Jesus used to describe “eateth” of this bread in (John 6:58).
That “eateth” means “gnaw, crunch, chew raw vegetables of fruits” as an animal would do in a continuing way.
The other word “eat” mana in the same verse is the normal eating or consuming of a meal as during a Passover feast.
The gnawing and crunching can not have a physical sense to it, since that would imply damage to bone. No bone was broken in Jesus’ one sacrifice on Calvary, so gnawing and crunching does not fit or make sense.
Exactly why would Jesus use that form of the word “eateth” if it was supposed to be talking about gnawing on His flesh as a meal? You don’t gnaw on flesh.

On the contrary; Jesus does ephasize the eating and drinking of his body and blood literally. I am impressed that you picked up on the context of the gnawing or chewing. This confirms that Jesus speaks that he is literally talking about eating and drinking. This takes away any symbolism attachments from the John 6 discourse. This is true, no bone was ever broken of Jesus at the passion. The flesh symbolic of the old covenant natural law, was layed to rest during the sabbath rest, when God rested from his works. What happens next goes against the natural law, the body of Jesus raises from the dead, in a glorified body. This new spiritual covenant which fulfilled the flesh old covenant into a new Spiritual covenant.

What you are trying to understand is how does the bread become the body of Jesus? how can we eat his flesh, by chewing on his flesh and bones? This is not what takes place in the temporal, the holy communion takes place in the present but is an eternal act being presented before God, this is the lamb in the book of Revelations “standing as though slain”.

The consecrated bread and wine, become Jesus body and blood by “transubstantiation”. This means the bread and wine remain these to our “flesh”, but to our soul they are the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ in the Spirit, “For it is the Spirit that gives life, for the flesh is of no avail”. So it is not flesh eating flesh. Jesus is alive and well. This Holy communion that takes place between the believer and God, is the unveiling (Revelation) when the bride and groom become one body,one flesh,one spirit, where God is all and in all “the apocalypse” made real.

This sacrificial heavenly banquet that takes place in the Mass where heaven and earth meet, in the wedding feast of the lamb. Is the bride ( the body of Jesus christ the Catholic church) and the groom ( the husband who is our maker) Jesus the head who is in heaven, are joined together in this wedding celebration of the lamb and his bride the Church. Where the body consumes the spiritual in order to recieve eternal life. This again is a promise from God, Why anyone would not want or claim this eternal promise from God is beyond me. Like I said in the earlier post, their is a lot more going on than the eyes meeting the words on the pages.

Let me know if you need to digress a point

Peace be with you

 

[ufamtobie]

Jesus did not bring His flesh down from heaven. That means that He was not talking about His flesh as “bread which came down from heaven”. You did not really address that point.

There is another problem with the word eateth that Jesus used to describe “eateth” of this bread in (John 6:58).
That “eateth” means “gnaw, crunch, chew raw vegetables of fruits” as an animal would do in a continuing way.
The other word “eat” mana in the same verse is the normal eating or consuming of a meal as during a Passover feast.
The gnawing and crunching can not have a physical sense to it, since that would imply damage to bone. No bone was broken in Jesus’ one sacrifice on Calvary, so gnawing and crunching does not fit or make sense.
Exactly why would Jesus use that form of the word “eateth” if it was supposed to be talking about gnawing on His flesh as a meal? You don’t gnaw on flesh.

BRKN1,

You are wasting your time here, don’t you have something else to do than spreading your gospel of bRKN1, here. You are a wolf in sheeps clothing, thats what you are here to all of the Faithful here. Don’t you have a life outside of this Catholic Forum?

Listen here, HERE IS A CLUE! A True Catholic will not change is beliefs that Our Lord left us regarding the True Presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist, for you or any other! If we did, we would all be like those other Apostles, who left Jesus, back in the day, Saying: “HOW CAN THIS MAN GIVE US HIS FLESH TO EAT.”

THIER MISTAKE and BRKN1, your MISTAKE as well! For thoses apostles said "how can this MAN." These apostles used the word MAN, What they did not know was the fact that Jesus Christ was not only **MAN but he was also GOD WHO CAN DO ALL THINGS! And one of those things is Giving us his FLESH TO EAT!

bRKN1, The Apostles who left Jesus, above, don’t you see that You have the same beliefs as they? … also, do you think they are saved? cause fact is, they left Jesus Christ for they and YOU did/do not believe he can give us his flesh to eat. I am not judging here, but the Bible states, those who don’t believe in Jesus Christ, and his Teachings are not saved.

Ufamtobie**

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

St. Paul, speaking of the chalice of benediction which they bless asks, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? He also asks, “…the bread which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?” No symbolism here, St. Paul believed in the real presence of the Lord.

1Co 10:16 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?

Below, St. Paul instructs the Church of Corinth on the Eucharistic communion. He tells in verse 26, everytime you eat of the bread and drink of the chalice you show, or commemorate, the death of our Lord until he comes again. Please note he uses the word often, as in as often as you do this. I point this out as some protestant churches do this once a year, symbolically. Is once a year often?

Please note, St. Paul warns of receiving unworthily in verse 27. In verse 28, in St. Paul’s instructions to the Church, he tells the Church to let a man prove himself. Once a man has proved himself, to be a believer, let him eat of the bread and drink of the chalice. Now in verse 29, St. Paul feels the necessity to repeat his instructions in verse 27 by saying, for he that eat and drink unworthily does so at the risk of bringing judgement upon himself because they have not discerned the body of the Lord. I don’t see any symbolism here. I firmly believe that St. Paul believed himself and taught the real presence of the Lord in the bread and chalice. Is receiving the bread and chalice as symbolic, discerning the body of the Lord?

1Co 11:23 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,
1Co 11:24 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.
1Co 11:25 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.
1Co 11:26 For as often as you shall eat this bread and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come.
1Co 11:27 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.
1Co 11:28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice.
1Co 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.

So you can see there is basically no difference in the King James version and the Catholic version of the Bibles, please see the King James version below.

1Co 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.
1Co 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
1Co 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
1Co 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

I’ve heard the argument that this is a spiritual meaning. If this were so, it would be like saying, let a man prove himself before the Church allows him to be a Christian. This makes no sense from a protestant or Catholic perspective. Protestants say you only need faith, St. Paul seems to indicate that a man must prove himself then LET him partake of the bread and chalice. Does this mean protestants get faith and then ask the church to allow them to believe in Christ, or be a Christian?

I’ve brought up these points before in a thread of the same topic. It was ignored.

May the peace of the Lord be with you,
Prodigal Son1

 

[brkn1]

BRKN1,

You are wasting your time here, don’t you have something else to do than spreading your gospel of bRKN1, here. You are a wolf in sheeps clothing, thats what you are here to all of the Faithful here. Don’t you have a life outside of this Catholic Forum?

Listen here, HERE IS A CLUE! A True Catholic will not change is beliefs that Our Lord left us regarding the True Presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist, for you or any other! If we did, we would all be like those other Apostles, who left Jesus, back in the day, Saying: “HOW CAN THIS MAN GIVE US HIS FLESH TO EAT.”

THIER MISTAKE and BRKN1, your MISTAKE as well! For thoses apostles said "how can this MAN." These apostles used the word MAN, What they did not know was the fact that Jesus Christ was not only MAN but he was also GOD WHO CAN DO ALL THINGS! And one of those things is Giving us his FLESH TO EAT!

bRKN1, The Apostles who left Jesus, above, don’t you see that You have the same beliefs as they? … also, do you think they are saved? cause fact is, they left Jesus Christ for they and YOU did/do not believe he can give us his flesh to eat. I am not judging here, but the Bible states, those who don’t believe in Jesus Christ, and his Teachings are not saved.

Ufamtobie
Hi Ufamtobie,
I most definitely have another life than this forum and I agree that it might be a waste of time. You must be having a bad day. That was quite an outburst.
bRKN1

 

[ufamtobie]

Hi Ufamtobie,
I most definitely have another life than this forum and I agree that it might be a waste of time. You must be having a bad day. That was quite an outburst.
bRKN1

Oh no not at all, i am having a blessed day thanks to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, thank you Jesus!

I am sorry i know the truth hurts, You hurt because becasue you don’t believe in Jesus Christ’s words.

You said it yourself, Yes, you are right it is a waste of your time being here.

At least i got you to acknowlede that it is a waste of your time. lol.

One day Lord Willing you will acknowledge the Truth about the Eucharist.

Ufamtobie

 

[brkn1]

Oh no not at all, i am having a blessed day thanks to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, thank you Jesus!

I am sorry i know the truth hurts, You hurt because becasue you don’t believe in Jesus Christ’s words.

You said it yourself, Yes, you are right it is a waste of your time being here.

At least i got you to acknowlede that it is a waste of your time. lol.

One day Lord Willing you will acknowledge the Truth about the Eucharist.

Ufamtobie

Your outburst does not seem to prove what you claim you received in the Eucharist. You are rather hostile and not at all what someone would expect if Jesus were in you.

 

[ufamtobie]

Your outburst does not seem to prove what you claim you received in the Eucharist. You are rather hostile and not at all what someone would expect if Jesus were in you.

Outburst? No not at all, no outbursts just only facts. You feel it is an outburst because deep down in your heart you know, it is the real presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist. It is your pride that has you going against Our Lords words and not believing.

Again, no outburst, only sadness for you.

Ufamtobie