Unless you eat my FLESH and drink my BLOOD you have no life in you.

[donnyblake]

How can Protestants ignore this command from Jesus? Many Perotestant churchs don’t even celebrate the Eucharist symbolically more than a few times a year,or maybe once a month. Just how far from the One True Faith have many Protestant sects gotten? How does this happen? Any thoughts? Thanks.

 

[Singinbeauty]

How can Protestants ignore this command from Jesus? Many Perotestant churchs don’t even celebrate the Eucharist symbolically more than a few times a year,or maybe once a month. Just how far from the One True Faith have many Protestant sects gotten? How does this happen? Any thoughts? Thanks.

26While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”

27Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28This is my blood of the** covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom.”**

30When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

Let me ask you something. Right here. Did Jesus take a chunk of Himself and feed it to the disciples? Did He prick Himself and and pour the blood into the cup and pass it around?

No, right?

Jesus spoke in parables so that those around Him would understand what He was talking about. He even says, plain as day:

"Drink from it, all of you. 28This is my blood of the covenant

, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom."
One minute He is calling it His blood and the very next breath He is calling it wine. Why would He tell them it was blood and then say it’s wine? Because calling it blood was saying what the wine represented. The blood that He was about to spill - His own blood. He wants us to partake in that sacrifice so we eat the bread and drink the wine to remember the sacrifice He made in a VERY real way.

When He says “Unless you eat my FLESH and drink my BLOOD you have no life in you.” He is saying that you have to remember and partake of the sacrifice. Even symbolism can be heavy. Just look at the parables!

 

[Madaglan]

Originally Posted by Singinbeauty:

Let me ask you something. Right here. Did Jesus take a chunk of Himself and feed it to the disciples? Did He prick Himself and and pour the blood into the cup and pass it around?

No, right?

Jesus spoke in parables so that those around Him would understand what He was talking about. He even says, plain as day:

A little crude, wouldn’t you say.

Let me ask you something. Right here. Did Jesus take a chunk of Himself and feed it to the disciples? Did He prick Himself and and pour the blood into the cup and pass it around?

No, right?

Jesus spoke in parables so that those around Him would understand what He was talking about. He even says, plain as day:

Perhaps it was both his real Blood and real wine, real Body and real bread.

We start from the literal sense. Christ says “this is my Body.” He gives his Body and his Blood to the Apostles: “Take and eat, all of you”…

The Eucharist itself is not simply a commemorative celebration but is intimately linked to the Cross. Partaking of the Body and Blood is partaking in the forgiveness Christ wins for us at Calvary.

If you look at Old Testament covenants, they were all sealed with blood. For example, the people of the Mosaic covenant were sprayed with the blood of sacrifice to seal them in covenant. Christ sheds real blood on Calvary. He does not simply symbolically die on the Cross. He truly dies on the Cross, in literal fulfilment of the Scriptures. His New Covenant is truly sealed in his own, real Blood, of which the members of his Mystical Body partake.

Not all Protestants see the Eucharist as simply “symbol.” Luther adamantly resisted this concept, so much so that the Lutherans and the Zwinglians were prevented from working together as one. Most of those Christians today who reject the Real Presence in the Eucharist can trace their theological heritage back to Zwingli.

 

[donnyblake]

Jesus meant what He said LITERALLY. It’s obvious, because right after He said it some of his disciples walked away in astonishment. He let them go too. He didn’t stop them and say, “Hey come back…I was just speaking figuratively, symbolically, or in parables.” No, He let them go because He meant exactly what He said. He also says, my flesh is REAL food and my blood is REAL drink. This confused some or even frightened them. He let them walk way and leave Him though. He didn’t change what He said and still hasn’t to this day. Thanks be to God for the Catholic Church who believes in the Real Presence of Jesus in the bread and wine. The Church is simply following Jesus’ command.

 

[Johndigger]

There are at least a few places in which your interpretation fails, SingingBeauty.

“Drink from it, all of you. 28This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29I tell you, I will not drink of this **fruit of the vine **from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

"I am the true vine, and my Father is the vine grower.

Firstly, isn’t Jesus the True Vine? This fit in perfectly with the Catholic interpretation - not yours.

Secondly, what do you make of John 6:51?
John 6:51:

I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world."

Hmmm, if we use your interpretation that Jesus talking symbolically, then you believe that He also gave his symbolic flesh on the cross.

Doesn’t really fit the Protestant interpretation, does it? Yet, it fits the Catholic perfectly.

Thirdly, you say

Even symbolism can be heavy.

Amen, Amen. It can be. We both agree that there is symbolism in the Bible.

However, by what Authority do you know when Jesus is talking symbolically and when he isn’t?

It certainly doesn’t say that he is speaking symbolically here. So, how do you know that He is?

JD

 

[sandusky]

donnyblake:

How can Protestants ignore this command from Jesus? Many Perotestant churchs don’t even celebrate the Eucharist symbolically more than a few times a year,or maybe once a month.

Donny, you are confusing two different events.

Your question: ”Unless you eat my FLESH and drink my BLOOD you have no life in you,” does not pertain to the eucharist/Christ’s Passover/the Lord’s supper, but to belief in Christ—read John 6 in context.

Catholics in the know, are always quick to point out that when Jesus talks about belief in Himself, He is not talking about a one-time event, but in continuous belief—24 hours a day, 7 days a week—as the Greek present tense indicates.

The same is true of John 6:54—it is about belief, and it is in the present tense (continuous action); in order to be consistent with the Catholic teaching of this verse as the literal eating of the Lord’s flesh, and blood, Catholics should be consuming the eucharist 24 hours a day, 7 days a week until they die; are you doing that?

If not, why not? :ehh:

When you read the account of the true Lord’s Supper, which again, is not found in John 6,
Christ gives no command as to how often that Supper is to be celebrated; He merely says “do this in remembrance of Me.”

Even Paul in 1 Cor 11 says of the eucharist, ”as often as you do this”—no specified frequency is given.

donnyblake:

Just how far from the One True Faith have many Protestant sects gotten? How does this happen?

Well, it would seem to me that my sect is certainly closer to the truth of this than your sect.

If your sect were consistent with their literal belief of what John is teaching in John 6:54, they would be consuming the eucharist 24 hours a day, 7 days a week without stopping; since they are not doing this, they are inconsistent in what they maintain concerning that verse.

 

[blessedtoo]

If your sect were consistent with their literal belief of what John is teaching in John 6:54, they would be consuming the eucharist 24 hours a day, 7 days a week without stopping; since they are not doing this, they are inconsistent in what they maintain concerning that verse.

We are. Everywhere in this world at any time of the day or night Mass is being said somewhere, people are receiving the Body and Blood, and we are obeying the Lord’s command.

 

[Johndigger]

We are. Everywhere in this world at any time of the day or night Mass is being said somewhere, people are receiving the Body and Blood, and we are obeying the Lord’s command.

Amen!
Malachi 1:11 King James:

For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense [shall be] offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name [shall be] great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.

So, Protestants, what pure sacrifice have you got that is offered “from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same”?

JD

 

[sandusky]

We are. Everywhere in this world at any time of the day or night Mass is being said somewhere, people are receiving the Body and Blood, and we are obeying the Lord’s command.

Christ is talking of individual consuming (HE who eats My flesh, etc.), not collective consuming; therefore, you, blessedtoo, are not obeying Christ with respect to your sects assertions that Christ is speaking of the eucharist in John 6:54; neither are the rest of your
sect’s members.

 

[blessedtoo]

Christ is talking of individual consuming (HE who eats My flesh, etc.), not collective consuming; therefore, you, blessedtoo, are not obeying Christ with respect to your sects assertions that Christ is speaking of the eucharist in John 6:54; neither are the rest of your
sect’s members.

I find it interesting how you pick and choose which words to interpret literallly. “He”, in your opinion, means the individual. Yet the actual words “eat My flesh”, repeated over and over by Christ, are symbolic. How is that consistent? And if we are going to employ your literal interpretation, where does Christ tell each individual to consume His flesh 24 hours a day? I didn’t see that directive in the Gospel.

 

[Madaglan]

Originally Posted by sandusky:

Christ is talking of individual consuming (HE who eats My flesh, etc.), not collective consuming; therefore, you, blessedtoo, are not obeying Christ with respect to your sects assertions that Christ is speaking of the eucharist in John 6:54; neither are the rest of your
sect’s members.

As regards the Last Supper: Christ gives his Body and Blood to his disciples, the Twelve Apostles, who are symbolically the New Israel, the Church. He gives his Body and Blood to both individual believers and the Church as a whole.

 

[Singinbeauty]

Amen!

So, Protestants, what pure sacrifice have you got that is offered “from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same”?

JD

Jesus is the ULTIMATE and pure sacrifice. That is why we do not need to offer burnt offerings to God any longer because Jesus paid that price FOR us. You quoted out of the Old Testament which would mean that they still made offerings to God. Since Jesus that is no longer needed since Jesus paid that price.

 

[Nella]

How can Protestants ignore this command from Jesus? Many Perotestant churchs don’t even celebrate the Eucharist symbolically more than a few times a year,or maybe once a month. Just how far from the One True Faith have many Protestant sects gotten? How does this happen? Any thoughts? Thanks.

I’ve said this a thousand times. You are lumping all Protestants together. We celebrate the Eucharist EVERY Sunday. We believe in the Real Presence. The Eucharist is the CENTER of our worship. The whole point of you instigation here is for you to take cheap shots at ALL Protestant churches and say that NONE of them have the real Eucharist. Well, I believe you are wrong and Scripture would support that you are also wrong. Jesus established a church of all believers, you included, but not you alone.

 

[sandusky]

madaglan:

As regards the Last Supper: Christ gives his Body and Blood to his disciples, the Twelve Apostles, who are symbolically the New Israel, the Church. He gives his Body and Blood to both individual believers and the Church as a whole.

What does that have to do with the issue raised in my original post? (Nothing—go back and
re-read it).

 

[sandusky]

blessedtoo:

I find it interesting how you pick and choose which words to interpret literallly. “He”, in your opinion, means the individual.

blessedtoo, what is the proper identification of “He,” as a part of speech?

blessedtoo:

Yet the actual words “eat My flesh”, repeated over and over by Christ, are symbolic.

John chapter six speaks of “belief” a third of the time more than it speaks of “flesh;” therefore, using your argument, belief is more important than flesh.

Also, your assertion that my position is that Christ’s words are “symbolic,” is a red-herring; go back to my original post, and look for the word “symbolic” in that post; it’s not there.

blessedtoo:

And if we are going to employ your literal interpretation, where does Christ tell each individual to consume His flesh 24 hours a day? I didn’t see that directive in the Gospel.

Again, I would direct you back to my original post, the part about believing being continuous because that is what the Greek tense indicates; I don’t think you’ve understood my original post.

 

[sandusky]

Not all Protestants see the Eucharist as simply “symbol.” Luther adamantly resisted this concept, so much so that the Lutherans and the Zwinglians were prevented from working together as one. Most of those Christians today who reject the Real Presence in the Eucharist can trace their theological heritage back to Zwingli.

What’s being rejected is transubstantiation.

 

[Madaglan]

Originally Posted by sandusky:

What’s being rejected is transubstantiation.

To whom are you refering? The participants in this thread or the Protestant Reformers?

The Protestant Reformers rejected transubstantiation, but several did not reject what we today know as the Real Presence. Luther insisted on this, and even Calvin veered away from Zwingli’s symbolism, prefering a spiritual presence.

 

[sandusky]

The Protestant Reformers rejected transubstantiation, but several did not reject what we today know as the Real Presence. Luther insisted on this, and even Calvin veered away from Zwingli’s symbolism, prefering a spiritual presence.

Agreed.

 

[CatholicChick]

Jesus meant what He said LITERALLY. It’s obvious, because right after He said it some of his disciples walked away in astonishment. He let them go too. He didn’t stop them and say, “Hey come back…I was just speaking figuratively, symbolically, or in parables.” No, He let them go because He meant exactly what He said. He also says, my flesh is REAL food and my blood is REAL drink. This confused some or even frightened them. He let them walk way and leave Him though. He didn’t change what He said and still hasn’t to this day. Thanks be to God for the Catholic Church who believes in the Real Presence of Jesus in the bread and wine. The Church is simply following Jesus’ command.

Amen! Very well said!!!

 

[Nella]

To whom are you refering? The participants in this thread or the Protestant Reformers?

The Protestant Reformers rejected transubstantiation, but several did not reject what we today know as the Real Presence. Luther insisted on this, and even Calvin veered away from Zwingli’s symbolism, prefering a spiritual presence.

Understood. Just because the Reformers rejected the idea of transubstantiation didn’t mean that they didn’t believe in the real presence. This is a famous tactic by many Catholics to try and say that if the bread and wine isn’t somehow metaphysically changed (which is un-Biblical) it cannot be the body and blood of Christ. i am certainly not putting myself into a position to tell Jesus where he can and cannot be especailly when he said in Scripture that where two or more are gathered in my name, there I will be