Saints in Heaven praying for us?

[Mickey]

SPOKENWORD:

People don,t take it literally because in John 4;32-35 Jesus said,I tell you the truth. It is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven,but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven.For the bread of God is He who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.Sir they said,Give us this bread. Jesus then declared,"I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry,and he who believes in Me will never be thirsty. This is the bread that I,m eating and the drink that I,m drinking. Jesus said it and I believe it. No more hunger no more thirst. WOW!!! God Bless

People, indeed take it very literally!

John 6: 48-56

I am the bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the desert: and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven: that if any man eat of it, he may not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.

Wow indeed!!!

 

[jimmy]

SPOKENWORD:

Incense was holy and it added fragrance to the prayers. It also showed honor and reverance to God.(Exodus 30;34-38) Representation of prayers? Incense and prayers are two seperate items. God Bless

Incense is a representation of prayers rising to God. God does not smell as we smell, He is pure spirit. How does incense show honor to God? The Exodus passage does not answer the question or oppose what I said. Incense in the book of Revelation is no different than prayers. Do you honestly think that the angels, which are spiritual beings, literally offer incense? No, that is a literary device, like many other things in Revelation, to show the point.

 

[mercygate]

SPOKENWORD:

Incense was holy and it added fragrance to the prayers. It also showed honor and reverance to God.(Exodus 30;34-38) Representation of prayers? Incense and prayers are two seperate items. God Bless

Ps 141:2 Let my prayer be counted as incense before thee,
and the lifting up of my hands as an evening sacrifice!

 

[Kay_Cee]

SPOKENWORD:

People don,t take it literally because in John 4;32-35 Jesus said,I tell you the truth. It is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven,but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven.For the bread of God is He who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.Sir they said,Give us this bread. Jesus then declared,"I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry,and he who believes in Me will never be thirsty. This is the bread that I,m eating and the drink that I,m drinking. Jesus said it and I believe it. No more hunger no more thirst. WOW!!! God Bless

If you don’t take it literally, you have a problem with the crucifixion.

Jesus said, “This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” (John 6:51)

The flesh he gave for the life of the world is His body at the crucifixion. Jesus Himself equates His physical body, which was physically crucified, with the Bread of Life.

If the Bread of Life is only figurative, or Jesus was speaking only spiritually, then so is the flesh of the crucifixion.

You can’t have it both ways.

 

[SPOKENWORD]

Mickey:

People, indeed take it very literally!

John 6: 48-56

I am the bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the desert: and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven: that if any man eat of it, he may not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.

Wow indeed!!!

Yes,That Flesh was sacrificed and given up feely on the cross.(John 6;51)Thats the FLESH Jesus is talking about.You drink blood and I,ll drink LIVING Water.You eat FLESH and I,ll eat the WORD. Jesus said that the WORDS He gave us are Spirit that gives life. I,ll also eat the spiritual Food Jesus talked about(John 4;34) God Bless

 

[SPOKENWORD]

mercygate:

Ps 141:2 Let my prayer be counted as incense before thee,
and the lifting up of my hands as an evening sacrifice!

Wouldn,t that mean that those prayers were sweet smelling to the Lord? The smoke of the incense symbolized the believers prayers. God Bless.

 

[Mickey]

SPOKENWORD:

Yes,That Flesh was sacrificed and given up feely on the cross.(John 6;51)Thats the FLESH Jesus is talking about.You drink blood and I,ll drink LIVING Water.You eat FLESH and I,ll eat the WORD. Jesus said that the WORDS He gave us are Spirit that gives life. I,ll also eat the spiritual Food Jesus talked about(John 4;34) God Bless

Protestants who take the symbolic view of the Lord’s Supper must ask themselves a few questions:

Except for some random heretical, schismatic, and gnostic groups, why was “The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist” believed for the first 1500 years of Christendom?

Why was a symbolic view adopted by many protestant groups shortly after the reformation?

If the symbolic view is correct, why did the Church have it wrong for the first 1500 years?

St Ignatius of Antioch was a disciple of the Apostle John and he believed in the “Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist”. Was he wrong too? Was St John the Apostle mistaken?

 

[JimO]

SPOKENWORD:

You also have pretty much the same going on in the RCC. There are those who believe that tongues were only for the early church and others that believe those gifts are alive and are for the church today. Look at the Charismatic movement within the RCC. Many in the RCC think they are crazy. So whos right or wrong within your own church.? God Bless

You are correct, and you have captured the central point of all my posts on this thread - individual interpretation of Scripture is dangerous.

The RCC teaches definitively on matters of faith through its teaching Authority given to the Church by Christ Himself. If individuals who call themselves Catholic and claim to be part of the Church disagree with any of those teachings, then they are wrong. On grave matters such as abortion and the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, if they disagree with Church teaching, they shouldn’t be calling themselves Catholic at all.

 

[JimO]

SPOKENWORD:

Yes,That Flesh was sacrificed and given up feely on the cross.(John 6;51)Thats the FLESH Jesus is talking about.You drink blood and I,ll drink LIVING Water.You eat FLESH and I,ll eat the WORD. Jesus said that the WORDS He gave us are Spirit that gives life. I,ll also eat the spiritual Food Jesus talked about(John 4;34) God Bless

Again, that is your interpretation of those texts and is inconsistent with Paul’s teaching in 1 Cor. 11 and the Gospel accounts of the Last Supper ("This is My Body…This is My Blood). The only person that has questioned the meaning of “is” was Bill Clinton.

How do you know that your interpretation is correct? And what if you are wrong?

 

[Mickey]

SPOKENWORD:

Jesus said that the WORDS He gave us are Spirit that gives life.

For Fundamentalist writers, the scriptural argument is capped by an appeal to John 6:63: “It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” They say this means that eating real flesh is a waste. But does this make sense?

Are we to understand that Christ had just commanded his disciples to eat his flesh, then said their doing so would be pointless? Is that what “the flesh is of no avail” means? “Eat my flesh, but you’ll find it’s a waste of time”—is that what he was saying? Hardly.

The fact is that Christ’s flesh avails much! If it were of no avail, then the Son of God incarnated for no reason, he died for no reason, and he rose from the dead for no reason. Christ’s flesh profits us more than anyone else’s in the world. If it profits us nothing, so that the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ are of no avail, then “your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished” (1 Cor. 15:17b–18).

In John 6:63 “flesh profits nothing” refers to mankind’s inclination to think using only what their natural human reason would tell them rather than what God would tell them. Thus in John 8:15–16 Jesus tells his opponents: “You judge according to the flesh, I judge no one. Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone that judge, but I and he who sent me.” So natural human judgment, unaided by God’s grace, is unreliable; but God’s judgment is always true.

And were the disciples to understand the line “The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life” as nothing but a circumlocution (and a very clumsy one at that) for “symbolic”? No one can come up with such interpretations unless he first holds to the Fundamentalist position and thinks it necessary to find a rationale, no matter how forced, for evading the Catholic interpretation. In John 6:63 “flesh” does not refer to Christ’s own flesh—the context makes this clear—but to mankind’s inclination to think on a natural, human level. “The words I have spoken to you are spirit” does not mean “What I have just said is symbolic.” The word “spirit” is never used that way in the Bible. The line means that what Christ has said will be understood only through faith; only by the power of the Spirit and the drawing of the Father (cf. John 6:37, 44–45, 65).

Catholic Answers

**

**

 

[JimO]

SPOKENWORD:

Wouldn,t that mean that those prayers were sweet smelling to the Lord? The smoke of the incense symbolized the believers prayers. God Bless.

Sorry, Spoken, but this is more personal interpretation.

I’m not trying to be disrespectful, but am trying to speak the truth in love. If I didn’t care about you, I wouldn’t take the time to respond.

 

[Mickey]

JimO:

Again, that is your interpretation of those texts and is inconsistent with Paul’s teaching in 1 Cor. 11 and the Gospel accounts of the Last Supper…
How do you know that your interpretation is correct?

The revisionists of the reformation re-interpreted the orthodox interpretation. It makes me very sad for those who adhere to the revised interpretations.

 

[SPOKENWORD]

JimO:

Sorry, Spoken, but this is more personal interpretation.

I’m not trying to be disrespectful, but am trying to speak the truth in love. If I didn’t care about you, I wouldn’t take the time to respond.

No offense taken Jim. We are always learning. God Bless

 

[mercygate]

Mickey:

The revisionists of the reformation re-interpreted the orthodox interpretation. It makes me very sad for those who adhere to the revised interpretations.

Mickey & JimO – we need to remember that following the Reformation, the breakaway Churches lost their Priesthood and therefore their theology had to develop an accommodation to the problem that they could not confect a Sacrament as the Church understands the word.

 

[Mickey]

mercygate:

Mickey & JimO – we need to remember that following the Reformation, the breakaway Churches lost their Priesthood and therefore their theology had to develop an accommodation to the problem that they could not confect a Sacrament as the Church understands the word.

This is a very good point. Without Holy Orders, everything had to be re-worked. However, the Lutherans continue to adhere to consubstantiation without the act of consecration.

 

[JimO]

Mickey:

The revisionists of the reformation re-interpreted the orthodox interpretation. It makes me very sad for those who adhere to the revised interpretations.

For my part, it’s not that I care about being right (I gave that up years ago). It’s just that those who don’t believe that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ (both Catholics and others) are missing an incredible Gift. If they would allow for a moment that the RCC might be correct on this matter and seriously and objectively look at the case for the Real Presence, they might encounter Jesus in a new and most intimate way. My gravest concern, though, is for those Catholics who go to Mass week in and week out and don’t realize what they are witnessing.

 

[SPOKENWORD]

JimO:

Again, that is your interpretation of those texts and is inconsistent with Paul’s teaching in 1 Cor. 11 and the Gospel accounts of the Last Supper ("This is My Body…This is My Blood). The only person that has questioned the meaning of “is” was Bill Clinton.

How do you know that your interpretation is correct? And what if you are wrong?

If I,m wrong with your belief,then,I,ve gained on what I believe. As you can see its our understanding that we cannot agree on…Either way this belief of mine or yours will keep no christian from entering into the Kingdom of Heaven. God Bless

 

[Mickey]

JimO:

For my part, it’s not that I care about being right (I gave that up years ago). It’s just that those who don’t believe that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ (both Catholics and others) are missing an incredible Gift. If they would allow for a moment that the RCC might be correct on this matter and seriously and objectively look at the case for the Real Presence, they might encounter Jesus in a new and most intimate way.

Yes, this is the reason for my sadness.

JimO:

My gravest concern, though, is for those Catholics who go to Mass week in and week out and don’t realize what they are witnessing.

And this is a cause for tears. :crying:

 

[mercygate]

Mickey:

This is a very good point. Without Holy Orders, everything had to be re-worked. However, the Lutherans continue to adhere to consubstantiation without the act of consecration.

:whacky:

 

[Mickey]

SPOKENWORD:

Either way this belief of mine or yours will keep no christian from entering into the Kingdom of Heaven.

I am not one to judge you SW–God is our judge. But I do have legitimate concern for you because at one time you accepted that the Holy Eucharist was the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ–and now you reject that.