Those who persecute Jesus will have eternal life

[USMC_Convert]

I was rereading one of my books and came across this bit of information which prompted me to write this. Let me know what you think about it, especially our Protestant brothers and sisters.

In the Bible when someone talks symbolically about eating the flesh of someone or drinking the blood of someone what is meant is to persecute and assault them. For scripture references see Ps 27:2; Isaiah 9:18-20; Isaiah 49:46; Micah 3:3; 2 Sam 23:15-17 and Rev 17:6, 16.

So, if the Protestants are correct then Jesus actually said “whoever persecutes and assaults me will have eternal life”?

OR

Do they believe Jesus didn’t know the scriptures and what they meant?

 

[seagal]

The difference I see here is that, as you pointed out, the Jews understood that phrase symbolically. But Jesus was not speaking symbolically, he was speaking about literally eating his body and drinking his blood.

After re-reading John 6:48-56, it’s clear that the Jews knew very well Jesus wasn’t speaking symbolically. He prefaced this by referring to the manna that their forefathers at in the desert and declaring he himself was bread from heaven. "I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh." The Jews responded by asking themselves “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” So they knew exactly what he meant.

 

[jcrichton]

I was rereading one of my books and came across this bit of information which prompted me to write this. Let me know what you think about it, especially our Protestant brothers and sisters.

In the Bible when someone talks symbolically about eating the flesh of someone or drinking the blood of someone what is meant is to persecute and assault them. For scripture references see Ps 27:2; Isaiah 9:18-20; Isaiah 49:46; Micah 3:3; 2 Sam 23:15-17 and Rev 17:6, 16.

So, if the Protestants are correct then Jesus actually said “whoever persecutes and assaults me will have eternal life”?

OR

Do they believe Jesus didn’t know the scriptures and what they meant?

Hi!

…or there could be more than one understanding:

43 ‘You have learnt how it was said: You must love your neighbour and hate your enemy. 44 But I say this to you: love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you; 45 in this way you will be sons of your Father in heaven, for he causes his sun to rise on bad men as well as good, and his rain to fall on honest and dishonest men alike. 46 For if you love those who love you, what right have you to claim any credit? Even the tax collectors do as much, do they not?

(St. Matthew 5:1-48)
…yes the expression is a visual on assault against a child of God; yet, Jesus came not to abolish the Law but to Fulfill it (Bring it to its Fullness).

…so Jesus elevates the act from mere human understanding to a Divine Fellowship:

58 This is the bread come down from heaven; not like the bread our ancestors ate: they are dead, but anyone who eats this bread will live for ever.’

(St. John 6:58)
Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Cachonga]

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst." John 6:35.

Seems to me Jesus interprets His meaning of eating and drinking early in the discussion. “Coming and believing” are the same as “eating and drinking”. The problem was the crowd DID think He was talking about literally eating His flesh and drinking His blood. I think that all of John 6 is a very informative chapter.

That is my response as a Protestant.

 

[jcrichton]

Seems to me Jesus interprets His meaning of eating and drinking early in the discussion. “Coming and believing” are the same as “eating and drinking”. The problem was the crowd DID think He was talking about literally eating His flesh and drinking His blood. I think that all of John 6 is a very informative chapter.

That is my response as a Protestant.

Hi!

…so you are intimating that it was a slight misunderstanding between what Jesus Claimed and Commanded and what His audience understood?

…so was Jesus careless or calloused when He willingly allowed them to turn from Him in confusion… further, when He demanded that the Twelve/Eleven just swallow the pill and shut up or leave?

…just thought I pour a little drama into your understanding…

…was St. Paul reaching when he made maneuvered people into thinking that Jesus was being literal and that there would be dire consequences for partaking of the Lord’s Supper in wanton disregard and disrespect?:

23 For this is what I received from the Lord, and in turn passed on to you: that on the same night that he was betrayed, the Lord Jesus took some bread, 24 and thanked God for it and broke it, and he said, ‘This is my body, which is for you; do this as a memorial of me’. 25 In the same way he took the cup after supper, and said, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Whenever you drink it, do this as a memorial of me.’ 26 Until the Lord comes, therefore, every time you eat this bread and drink this cup, you are proclaiming his death, 27 and so anyone who eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will be behaving unworthily towards the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone is to recollect himself before eating this bread and drinking this cup; 29 because a person who eats and drinks without recognising the Body is eating and drinking his own condemnation. 30 In fact that is why many of you are weak and ill and some of you have died. 31 If only we recollected ourselves, we should not be punished like that.

(1 Corinthians 11:23-30)
…if it is as you and your Protestant brothers think, St. Paul must have been quite a charlatan and drama queen!

…your Protestant siblings seem to be quite knowledgeable of Biblical languages… I’ve heard it said/expressed that Jesus Commanded that “they” (Believers) must “chew”/“masticate” His Body/Flesh… how do they explain a Command to chew/masticate a symbol or “coming and believing?”

…and what do you do with:

53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

(St. John 6:53-59)

Was Jesus ignorant, or another charlatan like St. Paul, seeking the adulating of the easily manipulated and managed?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[worldwideweary]

Never forget good ol’ Psalm 5:5 - Thou hatest all the workers of iniquity: thou wilt destroy all that speak a lie. The bloody and the deceitful man the Lord will abhor.

 

[hu324b]

We have more than the words from the bible on the Eucharist through private revelation approved by the church from the Saints of the Catholic Church that have shown us we have the right interpretation of the passage and the sacredness of the holy Eucharist.

Shall I name one - St Faustina - revelation of divine mercy.

 

[Cachonga]

jcrichton:

…so you are intimating that it was a slight misunderstanding between what Jesus Claimed and Commanded and what His audience understood?

Not at all. It was a big misunderstanding, but the fault was on the people, not Jesus.

…so was Jesus careless or calloused when He willingly allowed them to turn from Him in confusion… further, when He demanded that the Twelve/Eleven just swallow the pill and shut up or leave?

Jesus was neither careless nor calloused. I would point to Matt 13:10-16 (And the disciples came and said to Him, “Why do You speak to them in parables?” Jesus answered them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says,
‘YOU WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND;
YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE;
FOR THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL,
WITH THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR,
AND THEY HAVE CLOSED THEIR EYES,
OTHERWISE THEY WOULD SEE WITH THEIR EYES,
HEAR WITH THEIR EARS,
AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN,
AND I WOULD HEAL THEM.’), and assert that Jesus knows that these people will hear, but not understand, and see but not perceive, thereby fulfilling Scripture. And don’t forget what He said in John 6:44 (No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.). He knew who was drawn by the Father.

…just thought I pour a little drama into your understanding…

More like straw men.

…was St. Paul reaching when he made maneuvered people into thinking that Jesus was being literal and that there would be dire consequences for partaking of the Lord’s Supper in wanton disregard and disrespect?:

Funny. I see the word “memorial” in verses 24 and 25. If it was as your church claims, the “actual body, blood, spirit, soul and divinity”, why didn’t Jesus say “do this to me”? (Yeah, Jesus used the words “in memory” as well).

…if it is as you and your Protestant brothers think, St. Paul must have been quite a charlatan and drama queen!

If we believed your straw man arguments, perhaps.

…your Protestant siblings seem to be quite knowledgeable of Biblical languages… I’ve heard it said/expressed that Jesus Commanded that “they” (Believers) must “chew”/“masticate” His Body/Flesh… how do they explain a Command to chew/masticate a symbol or “coming and believing?”

Sorry. I’m packing for a move, so I don’t have my Greek sources available right now. However, I will give you something to chew on, “chew” doesn’t always deal with things you put in your mouth. Think about it carefully!

…and what do you do with: (John 6:53-59)

As I stated in my opening post, Jesus defines His meaning earlier in the discussion (“coming” and “believing” are the same as “eating” and “drinking”).

Was Jesus ignorant, or another charlatan like St. Paul, seeking the adulating of the easily manipulated and managed?

I think your straw men are misleading and dishonest.

 

[USMC_Convert]

Not at all. It was a big misunderstanding, but the fault was on the people, not Jesus.

Jesus was neither careless nor calloused. I would point to Matt 13:10-16 (And the disciples came and said to Him, “Why do You speak to them in parables?” Jesus answered them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says,
‘YOU WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND;
YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE;
FOR THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL,
WITH THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR,
AND THEY HAVE CLOSED THEIR EYES,
OTHERWISE THEY WOULD SEE WITH THEIR EYES,
HEAR WITH THEIR EARS,
AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN,
AND I WOULD HEAL THEM.’), and assert that Jesus knows that these people will hear, but not understand, and see but not perceive, thereby fulfilling Scripture. And don’t forget what He said in John 6:44 (No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.). He knew who was drawn by the Father.

More like straw men.

Funny. I see the word “memorial” in verses 24 and 25. If it was as your church claims, the “actual body, blood, spirit, soul and divinity”, why didn’t Jesus say “do this to me”? (Yeah, Jesus used the words “in memory” as well).

If we believed your straw man arguments, perhaps.

Sorry. I’m packing for a move, so I don’t have my Greek sources available right now. However, I will give you something to chew on, “chew” doesn’t always deal with things you put in your mouth. Think about it carefully!

As I stated in my opening post, Jesus defines His meaning earlier in the discussion (“coming” and “believing” are the same as “eating” and “drinking”).

I think your straw men are misleading and dishonest.

Friend, I’m happy your part of the conversation, however I am going to respectfully request that you keep charity in your heart as you respond to posts.

 

[Cachonga]

USMC_Convert:

Friend, I’m happy your part of the conversation, however I am going to respectfully request that you keep charity in your heart as you respond to posts.

Actually, I have been very charitable in my responses. It’s difficult sometimes when someone who claims to represent the God of Truth uses deceptive arguments. Also, remember, Jesus was charitable, yet he still called out people for their hypocrisy (even called some people snakes and vipers). For your sake, I will try to be even more charitable while on this thread.

 

[jcrichton]

Not at all. It was a big misunderstanding, but the fault was on the people, not Jesus.

Hi!

…there’s misunderstandings and then there’s rolling them over with a compressor… Jesus could not have been unaware that there was such huge “misunderstanding;” what sort of Preacher/Teacher would just rollover His audience?

Jesus was neither careless nor calloused. I would point to Matt 13:10-16 (And the disciples came and said to Him, “Why do You speak to them in parables?” Jesus answered them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says,
‘YOU WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND;
YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE;
FOR THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL,
WITH THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR,
AND THEY HAVE CLOSED THEIR EYES,
OTHERWISE THEY WOULD SEE WITH THEIR EYES,
HEAR WITH THEIR EARS,
AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN,
AND I WOULD HEAL THEM.’), and assert that Jesus knows that these people will hear, but not understand, and see but not perceive, thereby fulfilling Scripture. And don’t forget what He said in John 6:44 (No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.). He knew who was drawn by the Father.

…yeah, nice attempt… but Jesus is not speaking in parables here; Jesus is adamant that unless the Believers eat His Flesh and drink His Blood they will not have Life.

…did you ever come across Jesus’ Teachings where He repeats the same parable over and over?:

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. 52 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**. 53 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us** his flesh to eat**? 54 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. 55 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. 56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. 57 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. (St. John 6:51-57)
In the span of just a few minutes Jesus Drills: EAT (CHEW/GNAW) MY FLESH!

…can you demonstrate a Teaching “parable” where Jesus stresses His Authoritative Command in such a way as above?

More like straw men.

…actually, not; just wanted to mellow it down so that you would not perceive a personal attack.

Funny. I see the word “memorial” in verses 24 and 25. If it was as your church claims, the “actual body, blood, spirit, soul and divinity”, why didn’t Jesus say “do this to me”? (Yeah, Jesus used the words “in memory” as well).

…so you are stating that St. Paul and all of Jesus’ contemporary Apostles/Disciples just got it wrong… that they simply misunderstood Jesus as the rest of the disciples that left him?

…and all of the Christians that followed, till your denominational enlightenment, got it wrong? …that people who were persecuted and maligned for being “cannibals” just did not have enough commonsense and that they had no sense of self-preservation… that they obstinately insisted on a practice that put them at odd with society and in danger of being killed for “eating the flesh” of their “cult” leader?

If we believed your straw man arguments, perhaps.

…actually, not; it is your Chinese acrobatics that keeps you from accepting Jesus’ and His Disciples’ Teachings… Jesus states: “this is MY BODY,” and the Apostles state: “this is HIS BODY;” yet, you state: ‘just a symbol, don’t pay attention to the actual context or content.’ And you repeat the though/belief of those who left Jesus: ‘how can this man Command us to EAT HIS FLESH? No way will we do such thing!’

Sorry. I’m packing for a move, so I don’t have my Greek sources available right now. However, I will give you something to chew on, “chew” doesn’t always deal with things you put in your mouth. Think about it carefully!

Wow… that’s quite some unpacking… and 'flesh" probably refers to inked text, right?

As I stated in my opening post, Jesus defines His meaning earlier in the discussion (“coming” and “believing” are the same as “eating” and “drinking”).

…wow, you have hammered down the perfect illusion!

I think your straw men are misleading and dishonest.

Since it is the Holy Spirit Who can Discern what is in the Spirit of man, I will let Him determine my motives–though, I will offer my explanation, whether you receive it or not:

I’m concerned for your back tracking… I though that some strenuous, in your face, engagement could impact your mind, heart, and Spirit, into returning to the Fold!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Actually, I have been very charitable in my responses. It’s difficult sometimes when someone who claims to represent the God of Truth uses deceptive arguments. Also, remember, Jesus was charitable, yet he still called out people for their hypocrisy (even called some people snakes and vipers). For your sake, I will try to be even more charitable while on this thread.

Hi!

…your perception is flawed!

…there’s no deceptive argument being put forth…

…however, if you insist in finding uncharitableness, confusion and deception, check your self-defined religious tag… it’s like walking into a Taco Bell eatery and demanding a big mac!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Cachonga]

jcrichton:

…there’s misunderstandings and then there’s rolling them over with a compressor… Jesus could not have been unaware that there was such huge “misunderstanding;” what sort of Preacher/Teacher would just rollover His audience?

I simply refer you back to Matt 13:10-16.

…yeah, nice attempt… but Jesus is not speaking in parables here; Jesus is adamant that unless the Believers eat His Flesh and drink His Blood they will not have Life.

Regardless, the point is that they are not meant to believe, and Jesus (the very Son of God) knew this.

…did you ever come across Jesus’ Teachings where He repeats the same parable over and over?:

No, but I have encountered Catholics who will take part of a parable and create a doctrine (“pay the last farthing” (Matt 5:26 and Luke 12:59) and purgatory, is an example that comes to mind). Again, you miss where Jesus defines His meaning earlier in the discussion.

In the span of just a few minutes Jesus Drills: EAT (CHEW/GNAW) MY FLESH!

Just for future reference (when I have my Greek sources), what Greek word is being used for “eat”? Are you pulling this from a concordance/lexicon, or directly from the Greek text?

…can you demonstrate a Teaching “parable” where Jesus stresses His Authoritative Command in such a way as above?

Irrelevant to the fact that their minds have been darkened.

…actually, not; just wanted to mellow it down so that you would not perceive a personal attack.

No need to worry about that. Let’s drop this portion of the discussion.

…so you are stating that St. Paul and all of Jesus’ contemporary Apostles/Disciples just got it wrong… that they simply misunderstood Jesus as the rest of the disciples that left him?

Now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never said such a thing. I have pointed out that Jesus defined His terms earlier in the discussion than you allow, therefore, the misunderstanding is yours. If Jesus says “Do this IN MEMORY of Me”, and the Apostle Paul calls it a “MEMORIAL”, where do you get the idea that they considered this some kind of transubstantiation?

…and all of the Christians that followed, till your denominational enlightenment, got it wrong? …that people who were persecuted and maligned for being “cannibals” just did not have enough commonsense and that they had no sense of self-preservation… that they obstinately insisted on a practice that put them at odd with society and in danger of being killed for “eating the flesh” of their “cult” leader?

This is based on a faulty premise, and is not worthy to be commented on.

…actually, not; it is your Chinese acrobatics that keeps you from accepting Jesus’ and His Disciples’ Teachings… Jesus states: “this is MY BODY,” and the Apostles state: “this is HIS BODY;” yet, you state: ‘just a symbol, don’t pay attention to the actual context or content.’ And you repeat the though/belief of those who left Jesus: ‘how can this man Command us to EAT HIS FLESH? No way will we do such thing!’

Again, you’re putting words in my mouth. Where did I call it a “symbol” or tell anyone, “don’t pay attention to the actual context or content”? I pointed out that it is a “memorial” (as Jesus states and Paul affirms).

Wow… that’s quite some unpacking… and 'flesh" probably refers to inked text, right?
(and)
…wow, you have hammered down the perfect illusion!

This is unworthy of comment.

Since it is the Holy Spirit Who can Discern what is in the Spirit of man, I will let Him determine my motives–though, I will offer my explanation, whether you receive it or not:

I’m concerned for your back tracking… I though that some strenuous, in your face, engagement could impact your mind, heart, and Spirit, into returning to the Fold!

I appreciate your zeal for the church, and your desire to try and bring me back. However, my family has been trying for years, and all attempts to bring me back only confirm my belief that it was God that brought me out of the catholic church. Having been born and raise Roman Catholic, I have plenty of brothers and sisters who want to see me come back (and I want to see them delivered out of the catholic church just as strongly, but it’s in God’s hands).

On a final (and much less serious note), Chuck Norris once entered a Taco Bell and ordered a Big Mac - and he got it!

 

[USMC_Convert]

I simply refer you back to Matt 13:10-16.

Regardless, the point is that they are not meant to believe, and Jesus (the very Son of God) knew this.

No, but I have encountered Catholics who will take part of a parable and create a doctrine (“pay the last farthing” (Matt 5:26 and Luke 12:59) and purgatory, is an example that comes to mind). Again, you miss where Jesus defines His meaning earlier in the discussion.

Just for future reference (when I have my Greek sources), what Greek word is being used for “eat”? Are you pulling this from a concordance/lexicon, or directly from the Greek text?

Irrelevant to the fact that their minds have been darkened.

No need to worry about that. Let’s drop this portion of the discussion.

Now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never said such a thing. I have pointed out that Jesus defined His terms earlier in the discussion than you allow, therefore, the misunderstanding is yours. If Jesus says “Do this IN MEMORY of Me”, and the Apostle Paul calls it a “MEMORIAL”, where do you get the idea that they considered this some kind of transubstantiation?

This is based on a faulty premise, and is not worthy to be commented on.

Again, you’re putting words in my mouth. Where did I call it a “symbol” or tell anyone, “don’t pay attention to the actual context or content”? I pointed out that it is a “memorial” (as Jesus states and Paul affirms).

This is unworthy of comment.

I appreciate your zeal for the church, and your desire to try and bring me back. However, my family has been trying for years, and all attempts to bring me back only confirm my belief that it was God that brought me out of the catholic church. Having been born and raise Roman Catholic, I have plenty of brothers and sisters who want to see me come back (and I want to see them delivered out of the catholic church just as strongly, but it’s in God’s hands).

On a final (and much less serious note), Chuck Norris once entered a Taco Bell and ordered a Big Mac - and he got it!

Once there was a street named after Chuck Norris but they quickly renamed it because nobody crosses Chuck Norris and lives!!!

 

[PJM]

I was rereading one of my books and came across this bit of information which prompted me to write this. Let me know what you think about it, especially our Protestant brothers and sisters.

In the Bible when someone talks symbolically about eating the flesh of someone or drinking the blood of someone what is meant is to persecute and assault them. For scripture references see Ps 27:2; Isaiah 9:18-20; Isaiah 49:46; Micah 3:3; 2 Sam 23:15-17 and Rev 17:6, 16.

So, if the Protestants are correct then Jesus actually said “whoever persecutes and assaults me will have eternal life”?

OR

Do they believe Jesus didn’t know the scriptures and what they meant?

**
**

Ps.27: 2 When evildoers assail me, uttering slanders against me, my adversaries and foes, they shall stumble and fall.

Isa.9: 18 to 20 “For wickedness burns like a fire, it consumes briers and thorns;
it kindles the thickets of the forest, and they roll upward in a column of smoke.
Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts the land is burned, and the people are like fuel for the fire; no man spares his brother. They snatch on the right, but are still hungry, and they devour on the left, but are not satisfied; each devours his neighbor’s flesh

Isa.49: Behold, I have graven you on the palms of my hands; your walls are continually before me.

Mic.3: who eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them, and break their bones in pieces, and chop them up like meat in a kettle, like flesh in a caldron.

2 Sam.23:15 to 17 And David said longingly, “O that some one would give me water to drink from the well of Bethlehem which is by the gate!” Then the three mighty men broke through the camp of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem which was by the gate, and took and brought it to David. But he would not drink of it; he poured it out to the LORD, and said, “Far be it from me, O LORD, that I should do this. Shall I drink the blood of the men who went at the risk of their ives?” Therefore he would not drink it. These things did the three mighty men

Rev.17: 6 And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her I marveled greatly. 16 And the ten horns that you saw, they and the beast will hate the harlot; they will make her desolate and naked, and devour her flesh and burn her up with fire,

is it just ME? I’m having trouble following this logic?

 

[USMC_Convert]

**
**

Ps.27: 2 When evildoers assail me, uttering slanders against me, my adversaries and foes, they shall stumble and fall.

Isa.9: 18 to 20 “For wickedness burns like a fire, it consumes briers and thorns;
it kindles the thickets of the forest, and they roll upward in a column of smoke.
Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts the land is burned, and the people are like fuel for the fire; no man spares his brother. They snatch on the right, but are still hungry, and they devour on the left, but are not satisfied; each devours his neighbor’s flesh

Isa.49: Behold, I have graven you on the palms of my hands; your walls are continually before me.

Mic.3: who eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them, and break their bones in pieces, and chop them up like meat in a kettle, like flesh in a caldron.

2 Sam.23:15 to 17 And David said longingly, “O that some one would give me water to drink from the well of Bethlehem which is by the gate!” Then the three mighty men broke through the camp of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem which was by the gate, and took and brought it to David. But he would not drink of it; he poured it out to the LORD, and said, “Far be it from me, O LORD, that I should do this. Shall I drink the blood of the men who went at the risk of their ives?” Therefore he would not drink it. These things did the three mighty men

Rev.17: 6 And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her I marveled greatly. 16 And the ten horns that you saw, they and the beast will hate the harlot; they will make her desolate and naked, and devour her flesh and burn her up with fire,

is it just ME? I’m having trouble following this logic?

Protestants believe Christ was speaking symbolically when He said eat my flesh, drink my blood, However, when the Bible talks of eating and drinking someone’s body and blood symbolically it means to persecute or assault. So was Christ speaking symbolically or not?

 

[PJM]

Protestants believe Christ was speaking symbolically when He said eat my flesh, drink my blood, However, when the Bible talks of eating and drinking someone’s body and blood symbolically it means to persecute or assault. So was Christ speaking symbolically or not?

The Protestant understanding is neither biblical, historical, or factual. So NO, Christ was not speaking symbolically.

John 6:47-58 [Douay Bible]

[47] Amen, amen I say unto you: He that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. [48] I am the bread of life. [49] Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. [50] This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

[51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [52] 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. [53] The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? [54] 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. [55] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

DOUAY explanation of verse #54

[54] “Eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood”: To receive the body and blood of Christ, is a divine precept, insinuated in this text; which the faithful fulfil, though they receive but in one kind; because in one kind they receive both body and blood, which cannot be separated from each other. Hence, life eternal is here promised to the worthy receiving, though but in one kind. Ver. 52. 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. Ver. 58. He that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. Ver. 59. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.

[56] For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. [57] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. [58] As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me."

1st Cor. 11: 23-30
[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. [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. [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.

[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. [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. [28] But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. [29]** For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord**. [30] Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep" [SLEEP HERE MEANS SPIRITUAL DEATH]

HOW CAN PAUL’S TEACHING HERE BE TAKEN FOR ANYTHING EXCEPT LITERAL?.

GBY

 

[BornInMarch]

I was rereading one of my books and came across this bit of information which prompted me to write this. Let me know what you think about it, especially our Protestant brothers and sisters.

In the Bible when someone talks symbolically about eating the flesh of someone or drinking the blood of someone what is meant is to persecute and assault them. For scripture references see Ps 27:2; Isaiah 9:18-20; Isaiah 49:46; Micah 3:3; 2 Sam 23:15-17 and Rev 17:6, 16.

So, if the Protestants are correct then Jesus actually said “whoever persecutes and assaults me will have eternal life”?

OR

Do they believe Jesus didn’t know the scriptures and what they meant?

For what it’s worth, when Jesus was being crucified he asked God to forgive the people who were killing him because they did not know they were killing the Son of God.

 

[jcrichton]

I simply refer you back to Matt 13:10-16.

Regardless, the point is that they are not meant to believe, and Jesus (the very Son of God) knew this.

No, but I have encountered Catholics who will take part of a parable and create a doctrine (“pay the last farthing” (Matt 5:26 and Luke 12:59) and purgatory, is an example that comes to mind). Again, you miss where Jesus defines His meaning earlier in the discussion.

Just for future reference (when I have my Greek sources), what Greek word is being used for “eat”? Are you pulling this from a concordance/lexicon, or directly from the Greek text?

Irrelevant to the fact that their minds have been darkened.

No need to worry about that. Let’s drop this portion of the discussion.

Now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never said such a thing. I have pointed out that Jesus defined His terms earlier in the discussion than you allow, therefore, the misunderstanding is yours. If Jesus says “Do this IN MEMORY of Me”, and the Apostle Paul calls it a “MEMORIAL”, where do you get the idea that they considered this some kind of transubstantiation?

This is based on a faulty premise, and is not worthy to be commented on.

Again, you’re putting words in my mouth. Where did I call it a “symbol” or tell anyone, “don’t pay attention to the actual context or content”? I pointed out that it is a “memorial” (as Jesus states and Paul affirms).

This is unworthy of comment.

I appreciate your zeal for the church, and your desire to try and bring me back. However, my family has been trying for years, and all attempts to bring me back only confirm my belief that it was God that brought me out of the catholic church. Having been born and raise Roman Catholic, I have plenty of brothers and sisters who want to see me come back (and I want to see them delivered out of the catholic church just as strongly, but it’s in God’s hands).

On a final (and much less serious note), Chuck Norris once entered a Taco Bell and ordered a Big Mac - and he got it!

Hi!

…yeah, I can see that it did not take…

I am sorry for having been so abrasive… :imsorry::imsorry::imsorry:

I shall step aside and allow the Holy Spirit to guide you to the Fold without my meddling.

Also, I must retire from this exchange since we have hit the circular… :sad_bye::sad_bye::sad_bye:

God Bless!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Once there was a street named after Chuck Norris but they quickly renamed it because nobody crosses Chuck Norris and lives!!!

…yep, you got me!

Maran atha!

Angel