L
lanman87
Guest
I was showing the church has believed that Christ was the ark, with no mention of Mary.
- Status
S
steve-b
Guest
Read the section I quoted from John again. It’s not some thought process one goes through that Jesus is talking about.steve-b:
I eat His Body every moment I have faith and every time I put my faith into action…
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
And now you know differentlysteve-b:
I was showing the church has believed that Christ was the ark, with no mention of Mary.
L
lanman87
Guest
I did “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst." I have come to Christ and do not hunger and do not thirst.
L
lanman87
Guest
I know what differently. That Hippolytus was wrong to say the Ark was Christ? Or the Cyril was wrong to say the Ark was the symbol of Christ?
S
steve-b
Guest
I’m quoting the teachings of the Church that was THERE in the 1st centurysteve-b:
Not really. Jesus drew from her flesh, not her heart, mind and soul.
So was Jesus corrupted when Joseph first held him, or when he first walked on fallen soil, or ate her fruit?
I dont think He would have had a problem conceived in flesh He created, fallen yet justified and sanctified as a Jewish maiden. Fitting for His mission of literally taking on sin (evil as you call it), all of it, even becoming it.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
You can’t slide away from what I quoted.steve-b:
I did “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst." I have come to Christ and do not hunger and do not thirst.
His own disciples (not the 12) left Jesus over this. They couldn’t even listen to it. So they left not to follow Him again.
Jn 6:
53…“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; 54 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him …
IOW, if one doesn’t do what Jesus said to do,
THEN
- One has no life in them
- doesn’t have eternal life, as in won’t go to heaven, they go to Hell
ergo Jesus won’t raise THEM on the last Day for heaven, they go down instead to Hell - Ergo, Jesus doesn’t abide in then nor do they abide in Jesus
S
steve-b
Guest
I have no problem with that example,steve-b:
I know what differently. That Hippolytus was wrong to say the Ark was Christ? Or the Cyril was wrong to say the Ark was the symbol of Christ?
You have the problem, you don’t think it is Mary
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
So you believe Hippoltus and Cyril were wrong???
L
lanman87
Guest
From DesiringGod
But wanting the blessings Jesus provides is not the same thing as believing in him. Indeed, Jesus had come to give them bread from heaven. But not that kind of bread.
So, to test them, he began to make statements that sounded very strange. He told them that he was the true bread from heaven that gives life to the world, and whoever eats this bread would live forever.
So what did he mean? Here are the clues:
How do you labor for the food that endures to eternal life? Believe in me! (John 6:27, 29) “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me [in faith] shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” (John 6:35) “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40) “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.” (John 6:47)
But wanting the blessings Jesus provides is not the same thing as believing in him. Indeed, Jesus had come to give them bread from heaven. But not that kind of bread.
So, to test them, he began to make statements that sounded very strange. He told them that he was the true bread from heaven that gives life to the world, and whoever eats this bread would live forever.
Then he said, “And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh” (John 6:51). This sounded like cannibalism. His listeners balked. He pressed it even further:
The “Jesus for King” campaign evaporated. The people walked away, shaking their heads. The crazy man wants us to eat his flesh! They completely misunderstood what Jesus was saying.
So what did he mean? Here are the clues:
How do you labor for the food that endures to eternal life? Believe in me! (John 6:27, 29) “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me [in faith] shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” (John 6:35) “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40) “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.” (John 6:47)
S
steve-b
Guest
I didn’t say that.steve-b:
So you believe Hippoltus and Cyril were wrong???
L
lanman87
Guest
Well either they are wrong or the church is wrong.
L
lanman87
Guest
From ChristianityToday (J.I. Packer article)
The reference Jesus made to eating his flesh and drinking his blood is a metaphorical way of describing the person who draws on, claims, or lays hold of the reality of his atoning sacrifice by putting personal faith in him. We’ve constantly got to come back to that.
The Gospels capture that from beginning to end. Jesus is a person who confronts us through his Word. And when we realize that he’s confronting us, then we have to respond to him. That’s the ground, the base, of what’s being said in this passage. The flesh and the blood are words which point to Jesus’ death as a sacrifice, but it’s eating “me” that Jesus talks about—in other words, receiving him as he confronts us in his character as Savior and Lord.
The commentators say different things about this passage, but these references do not directly relate to the Lord’s Supper; instead they refer to what the Lord’s Supper is about—Christ’s upcoming sacrifice on Calvary. The Jews were understandably bewildered because they didn’t know that Calvary was coming, and so they scratched their heads and asked the question which at that stage was unanswerable, really: “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
The reference Jesus made to eating his flesh and drinking his blood is a metaphorical way of describing the person who draws on, claims, or lays hold of the reality of his atoning sacrifice by putting personal faith in him. We’ve constantly got to come back to that.
The Gospels capture that from beginning to end. Jesus is a person who confronts us through his Word. And when we realize that he’s confronting us, then we have to respond to him. That’s the ground, the base, of what’s being said in this passage. The flesh and the blood are words which point to Jesus’ death as a sacrifice, but it’s eating “me” that Jesus talks about—in other words, receiving him as he confronts us in his character as Savior and Lord.
The commentators say different things about this passage, but these references do not directly relate to the Lord’s Supper; instead they refer to what the Lord’s Supper is about—Christ’s upcoming sacrifice on Calvary. The Jews were understandably bewildered because they didn’t know that Calvary was coming, and so they scratched their heads and asked the question which at that stage was unanswerable, really: “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
S
steve-b
Guest
Last edited:
S
SyCarl
Guest
How did Augustine interpret Jesus’ statement you quote?
Jesus also says:
Sorry this was meant as a reply to Steve-b’ quote from John 6:53.
He says it is a figure not literal. I know Augustine was only one fallible man but has been named a Doctor of the Church and a saint. How could he get this so wrong, whatever he may written elsewhere?
Jesus also says:
Does this mean that all we have to do for salvation is to eat the Eucharist at a Catholic Church since according to transubstantiation anyone who eats it fulfills what Jesus says? He doesn’t say anything about the eating being licit as His statements are unconditional once someone eats and drinks.
Sorry this was meant as a reply to Steve-b’ quote from John 6:53.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
As I’ve said many times already here and on other forums,
Whether it’s Packer, or Horton, or whoever,
Protestants don’t have valid ordination. Ergo no valid consecration occurs. Ergo, if you were to worship YOUR communion elements, whatever you use, as being the actual body and blood of Jesus, THAT is idolatry.
L
lanman87
Guest
Charles Spurgeon
If this should refer to the Lord’s supper, then it is certain that the dying thief could not have entered heaven, for he never sat down at the communion table, but was converted on the cross, and without either baptism or the Lord’s supper, immediately went with his Master into Paradise. It can never be proved; indeed, it is utterly false that no one has eternal life if he has not received the bread and wine of the communion table; and on the other hand, it is certainly equally untrue that whoever eats Christ’s flesh has eternal life, if by that it is meant everyone who partakes of the Eucharist, for there are unworthy receivers, not here and there, but to be found by hundreds. Alas, there are apostates who leave the Lord’s table for the table of demons, who profane the holy name they once professed to love: there are also many who have received the sacramental bread and wine, and yet live in sin, who increase their sin by daring to come to the table, and who, alas, we fear, will die in their sins as many others have done.
- Our Lord Jesus did not in this passage allude to the Lord’s supper, as some desiring to maintain their sacramental superstitions have dared to affirm. I will not dwell upon the argument that there was no Lord’s supper at the time to allude to, though there is certainly some force in it, but I will rather remind you that with such an interpretation this passage would not be true…
If this should refer to the Lord’s supper, then it is certain that the dying thief could not have entered heaven, for he never sat down at the communion table, but was converted on the cross, and without either baptism or the Lord’s supper, immediately went with his Master into Paradise. It can never be proved; indeed, it is utterly false that no one has eternal life if he has not received the bread and wine of the communion table; and on the other hand, it is certainly equally untrue that whoever eats Christ’s flesh has eternal life, if by that it is meant everyone who partakes of the Eucharist, for there are unworthy receivers, not here and there, but to be found by hundreds. Alas, there are apostates who leave the Lord’s table for the table of demons, who profane the holy name they once professed to love: there are also many who have received the sacramental bread and wine, and yet live in sin, who increase their sin by daring to come to the table, and who, alas, we fear, will die in their sins as many others have done.
L
lanman87
Guest
We have a rightful understanding of what it means to Eat His Flesh and Drink His Blood and it is bound up in faith and trust, not in Aristotle’s ideas of Accidents and Substance.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
Spurgeon?
Do I need to repeat myself over and over and over again?
And RE: the good thief
In the few words he spoke that we have recorded,
Being in massive agony on his own cross
AND
Lk 23
38There was a written notice above him, which read:|sc THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
39One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!”
40But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.”
42Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[f]”
43Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.”
So
The “good” thief
- rebuked the other criminal’s insults of Jesus in front of everyone present, while experiencing death by crucifixion himself.
- He witnesses to the thief and all who are present to the crucifixion, as well as to all humanity who read this passage of scripture that he acknowledges that Jesus is God
- He admits he has done wrong, and Jesus is innocent. Not only is he expressing contrition under severe agony himself for the crimes he has committed
- He then Asks Jesus for mercy and to take him to His kingdom,
point being
the thief, in massive agony himself, did ALL this before he dies.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
It is NOT bound up in Aristotle’s accidents and substancesteve-b:
We have a rightful understanding of what it means to Eat His Flesh and Drink His Blood and it is bound up in faith and trust, not in Aristotle’s ideas of Accidents and Substance.
It is right from Our Lord’s own words.
Lk 22: 17 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, “Take this, and divide it among yourselves; 18 for I tell you that from now on I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” 19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body which is given for you. Do this ποιεῖτε in remembrance of me.” 20 And likewise the cup after supper, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."[c]
do this……. ποιεῖτε
Definition:
(a) make, manufacture, construct, (b) do, act, cause, to appoint or ordain one, to change one thing into another,
Jesus in those words,
is ordaining His apostles to do exactly what He is doing here, namely change bread and wine into His body and blood that will be given up for us. IOW it is also a sacrifice.
AND
The Catholic Church and it’s hierarchy, is sitting at that table.
Last edited:
- Status