Most Protestant Say John 6 Is Symbolic

[Bill_Pick]

The Holy Eucharist in the Old Testament…Consuming the Lamb Slain (Rev 5:6), or participating in the Eucharistic Meal, or Supper, is prefigured or “TYPED” in the Old Testament. The Lamb of GOD is depicted throughout the Bible as being Jesus Christ…
“Behold, the Lamb of GOD, who takes away the sin of the world.”
These are words spoken by John the Baptist in John 1:29 as he saw Jesus coming to him.In Exodus 12:1-22, the Israelites, in order to avoid the slaying of their firstborn by the “Angel of Death”, were commanded by GOD to take an unblemished male lamb (12:5)and slaughter it (12:6), and apply its blood to the two doorposts, and the lintels of every household which did partake of the Lamb (12:7). Now look at verse (12:8), and you will clearly see that in order for their firstborn to be saved, they had to eat the Lamb as well. Is this not what we do in the sacrifice of the Mass? Are we not to be saved by consuming the Body and the blood of the Lamb as shown in John Chapter 6:33-58?In Exodus 16:13-16, is the story of the quail and the manna which fed the Israelites as they proceeded through their desert trek. GOD provided the bodily food for the hundreds of thousands involved. Can you imagine how much food was required for all of these people every day? There were 600,000 men alone, not counting women and children. See Exodus 12:37.
The quail and the manna are "TYPED of the Holy Eucharist. See John 6:32.The prophet Malachi tells us what is to come regarding the Holy Eucharist. Malachi 1:11:
“For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, My name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to My name a CLEAN OBLATION.”
Malachi has said there will be no more bloody sacrifices to GOD as was done in the Old Testament. The Catholic Church offers the sacrifice of the Mass, and a “clean oblation”, the Holy Eucharist, all over the world, and around the clock. This prophecy of Malachi has been fulfilled.

 

[Fisher]

So do most Cathloics I talk to.

 

[Ross09]

So do most Cathloics I talk to.

Them’s fightin’ words!

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

nm

God bless

 

[mfbukowski]

Genesis 14:17 among other places. What was the priesthood Melchizadek had? It was not Levitical. Why did Abraham pay him tithes, and arguably have a “communion service”? And why is Christ said to be a Priest forever after the order of Melchizadek?

Who was this guy and what were they doing?

Your other cites apply only if you believe Catholic tradition, which I do not accept

Ok let’s get the story straight about the fabled post 124.

I asked you the above question originally, which YOU DODGED with post 124, as follows in its entirety, with my comments. You still have not answered the above, yet persist in attacking other aspects of my beliefs which have nothing to do with this thread.

It is like me asking : Do you really believe in the immaculate conception and that Mary was taken bodily to heaven-- how is that biblical?

But I am not asking that, because that is not the topic of this thread

Post 124:

Nice dodge, although I find it contradictory that you profess to use your brain yet exclude anything that challenges your position.

I also provided these, which you conveniently opted to ignore:
St. Matthew 26:26-28
St. Mark 14:22-24
St. Luke 22:19-20
1 Corinthians 11:24-25

No it is you who are dodging me. I gave you a bread and wine analogy which you totally dodged. Then you came up with these scriptures which are all “For this is my body” scriptures, which is an issue I already answered. You are beating a dead horse. Jesus also said he was a shepherd and a gate and a road, but he was none of those things. Neither is he a piece of bread. Remember all that?

Very well, let me help you with “eating flesh” and “drinking blood” analogies in the Bible:

Micah 3:1-3 You that hate good, and love evil: that violently pluck off their skins from them and their flesh from their bones? 3 Who have eaten the flesh of my people, and have flayed their skin off them: and have broken, and chopped their bones as for the kettle, and as flesh in the midst of the pot.

Isaiah 9:20 20 And he shall turn to the right hand, and shall be hungry: and shall eat on the left hand, and shall not be filled: every one shall eat the flesh of his own arm: Manasses Ephraim, and Ephraim Manasses, and they together shall be against Juda.

Isaiah 49:26 26 And I will feed thy enemies with their own flesh: and they shall be made drunk with their own blood, as with new wine: and all flesh shall know, that I am the Lord that save thee, and thy Redeemer the Mighty One of Jacob.

Well I agree that all these use the words “flesh” and “blood” and are indeed violent images. What they have to do with the eucharist in their contexts, I haven’t a clue and you haven’t shown.

To Jews of Christ’s day, to “eat someone’s flesh and drink someone’s blood” was synonymous with persecution, violence, betrayal, bitterly hate, and murder. Also, “to drink some one’s blood”, in Scripture, especially, has no other figurative meaning than that of dire chastisement (“The Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma” by Dr. Ludwig Ott).

That’s nice. Not surprising since he was persecuted hated etc. So to me, this proves that he was using an analogy. He was saying that he would be persecuted and hated, not that people were to literally eat his flesh.

That’s why, if Jesus had been speaking figuratively, his words would have made no sense at all. He would have been saying, “I solemnly assure you that unless you persecute and betray me you have no life within you. He who does violence to me has eternal life and I will raise him up on the last day.” That makes no sense at all, but that’s exactly what he would have been saying if his words were symbolic.

Ah, but you are wrong. Your sentence makes perfect sense if it is taken as being said to all mankind. Let me illustrate by adding a few words to your words to show my point.

“I solemnly assure you that unless you,( humanity,) persecute and betray me you have no life within you.(because I need to die for you in order to save you) (You as part of humanity, ) who (do) violence to me has eternal life (and savation through my death and resurrection ) and I will raise him up on the last day.”

So you have made my point for me. This is I think precisely what the savior was saying. Thanks for that.

You further miss one very important point. You want me to take this literally, not figuratively. The small point is that we cannot take it literally because we don’t eat flesh and drink blood literally.

We eat and drink bread and wine. There is a little difference. You go to jail for taking it literally.

That is why we “take it figuratively”

 

[mfbukowski]

The Holy Eucharist in the Old Testament…Consuming the Lamb Slain (Rev 5:6), or participating in the Eucharistic Meal, or Supper, is prefigured or “TYPED” in the Old Testament. The Lamb of GOD is depicted throughout the Bible as being Jesus Christ…
“Behold, the Lamb of GOD, who takes away the sin of the world.”
These are words spoken by John the Baptist in John 1:29 as he saw Jesus coming to him.In Exodus 12:1-22, the Israelites, in order to avoid the slaying of their firstborn by the “Angel of Death”, were commanded by GOD to take an unblemished male lamb (12:5)and slaughter it (12:6), and apply its blood to the two doorposts, and the lintels of every household which did partake of the Lamb (12:7). Now look at verse (12:8), and you will clearly see that in order for their firstborn to be saved, they had to eat the Lamb as well. Is this not what we do in the sacrifice of the Mass?
.

What- eat lamb? I don’t recall that from my Catholic up bringing.

The quail and the manna are "TYPED of the Holy Eucharist. See John 6:32.The prophet Malachi tells us what is to come regarding the Holy Eucharist. Malachi 1:11:

Yep, a type is some that that STANDS FOR something else. A symbol.

Malachi has said there will be no more bloody sacrifices to GOD as was done in the Old Testament. The Catholic Church offers the sacrifice of the Mass, and a “clean oblation”, the Holy Eucharist, all over the world, and around the clock. This prophecy of Malachi has been fulfilled.

Yes it has. Not a drop of blood. That is because bread is offered in its place.

 

[mfbukowski]

If you don’t mind me throwing in my 2 cents . . .

What words are spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus’ flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us.

In 6:55 Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His body and blood being actual food and drink. Then the unbelievers ask, “Who can ‘listen’ to it much less understand it?”, because to the unillumined mind, it seems grotesque.

In 6:61-63 Jesus acknowledges their disgust. So, his use of the phrase “the spirit gives life” means the disciples need supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words.

Jesus used the comparison of “spirit versus flesh” to teach about the necessity of possessing supernatural faith versus a natural understanding in other places as well.

**What is born of flesh is flesh and what is born of spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I told you, ‘You must be born from above.’ (John 3:6-7)

Watch and pray that you may not undergo the test. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak." (Mark 14:38)**

Paul also uses the “spirit/flesh” comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not receiving the gift of faith. They are still “in the flesh.”

**Now the natural person does not accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him it is foolishness, and he cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually. (1 Cor 2:14)

Brothers, I could not talk to you as spiritual people, but as fleshly people, as infants in Christ. I fed you milk, not solid food, because you were unable to take it. Indeed, you are still not able, even now, for you are still of the flesh. While there is jealousy and rivalry among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving in an ordinary human way? (1 Cor 3:1-3)

For those who live according to the flesh are concerned with the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the spirit with the things of the spirit. (Rom 8:5)

For the flesh has desires against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; these are opposed to each other, so that you may not do what you want. (Gal 5:17)**

So, we must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. Many of Jesus’ disciples left rejecting his literal words that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. They understood Him correctly but would not believe.

No they didn’t understand him correctly because that is not what he did.

What you guys I think are not seeing is that this makes Jesus to be a liar. They left out because what they believed was that Jesus was going to give them human meat and blood. That is what you said.

That essentially makes Jesus say to them – you left because you thought this was going to be disgusting – but ha ha – fooled ya-- it’s really bread and wine that I give you, so it won’t be disgusting at all.

Why didn’t he tell them the truth (from your pov) and say “I am going to turn my body into bread and wine”?

 

[mfbukowski]

The Church is not some wacko cult, like some other groups out there. We aren’t brainwashed.

But, our consciences must be well-formed according to the divine light of revelation, which the Church is the guardian of.

And how is saying I completely disagree with you not civil?

I wasn’t really talking to you, and I probably stated it too strongly to make my case rhetorically. You have always been civil imo.

I don’t think you are brainwashed either and I didn’t mean to imply that. We are encouraged to question every doctrine and get our own testimonies, which means getting our own revelation that each doctrine is true. If we disagree we are free to leave the church obviously. There are not “dissenting Mormons” there are only exmormons! But if we don’t believe the doctrine, we leave. Why belong to a church you don’t believe in?

 

[mfbukowski]

The accidents of bread and wine do not change, but the substance of the bread and wine are the glorified and risen Christ.

There is no such thing as substance and accidents. What does that mean? This goes back to Aquinas and is 800 year old philosophy which no one has taken seriously for probably at least 300 years, except Catholic theologians.

It has also recently been discovered that the earth goes around the sun.

 

[Bill_Pick]

What- eat lamb? I don’t recall that from my Catholic up bringing.

Yep, a type is some that that STANDS FOR something else. A symbol.

Yes it has. Not a drop of blood. That is because bread is offered in its place.

I CAN SEE YOU DID NOT LEARN ANY THING FROM YOU CATHLOIC UP BRINGING

 

[mfbukowski]

Let’s see, Christ said in Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; “this IS my body and blood.”

In John 6, Jesus says he is the bread of life.

You do not understand so you walked away. To use a term you had assigned in one of your posts to describe those who walked away from Christ in John 6, you would be a goat…

LOL CFR And who says I walked away? I have other things to do and can’t just sit and play with you people on the computer all day.

St. Peter said that Christ had the words of everlasting life. he did not understand, but he believed and did not walk away.

After the resurrection, on the Emmaus, when did the Apostles realize it was Jesus with whom they walked? Whenhe broke the bread.

See any parallels here?

Uh, not really. They remembered him doing that because it was to be done in his remembrance.

 

[mfbukowski]

We are told that we become new creations in Christ. Should we take before and after DNA tests to confirm?

God bless

Of course not. Because our DNA does not change when this happens. Because bread and wine is not flesh. Our flesh does not literally change. I asked about chemical changes because there’re aren’t any, but you took me literally I guess. There’s a lot of that going around here.

 

[mfbukowski]

For those of you who wish to compare Catholicsm and Mormonism, this site may be of help:

comparing-views.com/

Strawman distortions and lies. So what else is new?

 

[mfbukowski]

nm

God bless

Wow. It seems like you shut off this thread with this cryptic post.

What does this mean? Or am I wrong?

Anyway, I wanted to post this for the record.

 

[Bill_Pick]

Wow. It seems like you shut off this thread with this cryptic post.

What does this mean? Or am I wrong?

Anyway, I wanted to post this for the record.

will you please explain what you are talking about.

 

[distracted]

Show me one time where the word (to eat or chew, trogo) in the Greek is used symbolically anywhere in the New Testament, the Old Testament, the Septuagint, or even in ancient secular literature. If every time it is used in the bible and ancient literature it is used in a literal sense, we must use it that way in exegeting John 6. If it has never been used in the way that Protestants impose on John 6, then the figurative sense of eating flesh can not be possible.

Protestants say it is symbolic because they have never been in the Real Presence…

 

[Bill_Pick]

Protestants say it is symbolic because they have never been in the Real Presence…

its like all questions about the Real Presence they can’t or will not have a answer

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

Wow. It seems like you shut off this thread with this cryptic post.

What does this mean? Or am I wrong?

Anyway, I wanted to post this for the record.

I had miss read another posters post. After I responded I went back and reread what they had wrote and they had answered my question already in their previous post but I had over looked it. So I edited my post to keep the thread from being derailed.

nm = “never mind” or “no message” however you want to read it…

In case you are wondering, no it was not any post of yours…

Do you always look for the worst of intentions in people?

God bless

 

[mfbukowski]

I had miss read another posters post. After I responded I went back and reread what they had wrote and they had answered my question already in their previous post but I had over looked it. So I edited my post to keep the thread from being derailed.

nm = “never mind” or “no message” however you want to read it…

In case you are wondering, no it was not any post of yours…

Do you always look for the worst of intentions in people?

God bless

Not at all. It was just weird that everyone was really on attack mode and then disappeared after that post. It was almost as if it was a signal to break off the battle.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

Not at all. It was just weird that everyone was really on attack mode and then disappeared after that post. It was almost as if it was a signal to break off the battle.

I wish I had that much influence and authority around here

God bless