Were non-Catholics prefigured in those who left Christ in John 6?

[paidion]

Paidon,

from my limited knowledge, when we bless a man or a marriage or a house or water etc, we ask for God to be present and from a Catholic point of view a Catholic priest is the one that does the blessing. I bow to your knowledge if it was a different understanding at the time we are speaking of.

I’m sorry i don’t know the answers to your questions about when blessings may have changed.

Verses showing use of breaking of bread in NT :

Acts 3:46 “Every day they devoted themselves to meeting together in the temple area and to breaking bread in their homes. They ate their meals with exultation and sincerity of heart”. New Catholic Translation. (what else )

1 Corinthians 10:16-18
“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar ?”

Acts 2:42
“And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread …”

1 Corinthians 11:26-30
“For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.”

I appreciate your response… however, I believe the passages referring to the “breaking of bread” have to do with the believers sharing a meal together rather than partaking of the L-rd’s Supper. — I’ve heard that one could not really share a meal unless they had bread. (hmmmm… there’s food for thought)

Regarding the passage from I Corinthians 11, while that does refer to the L-rd’s Supper, it doesn’t refer to how often it should be done. Since the L-rd’s Supper was from the Passover seder, wouldn’t it make sense that the observance would also be at that time? And since Passover was an everlasting ordinance to be observed once a year, wouldn’t it follow that the L-rd’s Supper would also be once a year? The phrase “for as often as you eat this bread…” doesn’t necessarily say that one must do it often. Rather the implication is that WHEN one does it, it should be done appropriately.

Please understand I’m not trying to bash RC doctrine (or anyone’s doctrine for that matter). I’m just trying to figure out why there’s such a jump from the Jewish custom of observing Passover and what appears to be the institution of a whole new set of practices. Why would there be a need to make such a leap? (Especially in light of Messiah’s words that He came to fulfill the Law and not to abolish it.)

 

[abucs]

It’s a good question Paidon. Perhaps one for a forum apologist ?
I do read the breakng of the bread in the context above as being a daily rememerence of the eucharist but like many scriptures, it could be read another way, although as i say, for me personally, the devotion, sincereity of heart and exultation suggest worship.

Next time.

 

[po18guy]

I think we need to keep reading this chapter because John clearly writes just a few versus later that Jesus says the following: It is the Spirit who gives life;(CQ) the flesh is no help at all. One thing I always hated in many Catholic Churches I attended was the inability to receive the wine. We received the bread but only the Priest drank the wine.

One thing commonly forgotten here is that the eleven, Paul, Barnabas, Polycarp (taught by the Apostle John), Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus and almost 2,000 years of Christians have believed fervently in the Eucharist and practiced it without interruption. Since it is a Sacred Tradition, also documented in Sacred Scripture, there has been no confusion of misinterpretation of either John 6 or 1 Corinthians 11. All of the other teachings are heretical in nature. God rewards obedience. I choose obedience. This is how you “deny yourself, take up your cross and follow me”

If anyone “used to be” Catholic, I tell you that you still are. Deny yourself, take up your cross, be reconciled to the church and eat His Sacred Body and drink His Sacred Blood. If you truly love Jesus, follow Him to where He lives - in the Tabernacle.

Christ’s peace.

 

[climer97007]

Were the “disciples” who complained (protested?) to Christ over His teaching in John 6:60, and who left Him in John 6:66 the prefigurement of those who deny the Eucharist to this day?

The modern non-Catholic Christian is prefigured by the unbelieving Jews who could not see God present in the Christ Jesus. These Jews could not believe that God would or could condescend to becoming a mere man.

These unbelieving Jews thus prefigure all those who fail to see the even the possibility of the Christ Jesus coming to us now in the form of mere Bread and Wine. After all, they might ask in their hearts, how could God turn mere bread or wine into Himself?

If the Jew could not see God in the form of a mere man, the modern can not see God in the form of mere bread or wine.

Gene

 

[paidion]

One thing commonly forgotten here is that the eleven, Paul, Barnabas, Polycarp (taught by the Apostle John), Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus and almost 2,000 years of Christians have believed fervently in the Eucharist and practiced it without interruption. Since it is a Sacred Tradition, also documented in Sacred Scripture, there has been no confusion of misinterpretation of either John 6 or 1 Corinthians 11. All of the other teachings are heretical in nature. God rewards obedience. I choose obedience. This is how you “deny yourself, take up your cross and follow me”

If anyone “used to be” Catholic, I tell you that you still are. Deny yourself, take up your cross, be reconciled to the church and eat His Sacred Body and drink His Sacred Blood. If you truly love Jesus, follow Him to where He lives - in the Tabernacle.

Christ’s peace.

Just because something is older or been around longer doesn’t necessarily make it true. Likewise, the fact that many ppl believe “it” doesn’t make it true either. If that were the case then, Judaism should be more true than Christianity because it has been around for a longer period of time. Even Jesus Himself was a Jew - so that also should give credence to Judaism.

My point is that while you may be correct in your assertion that the bread and wine are literally the body and blood of Christ (I’m neither agreeing or disagreeing with you), the justification of your position is weak/faulty.

I apologize for this post being totally off subject, but I didn’t feel I could let this one slip by.

shalom

 

[mark_a]

it’s John 6:66.

protestants must be the anti-Christ!!!

Wow! That’s a switch. I must be in bizarro world, where up is down, left is right, good is evil, black is white. . . . . .

 

[pismopal]

I have read the words of John 6 many many times and it is a mystery to me why our non Catholic Christian friends of whatever stripe:shrug would not come to the conclusion that Christ meant exactly what He said…over and over. People who put so much emphasis on reading and studying the Bible ( including my own family ) will not see the meaning of Christ’s words because, it seems, it is outside the realm of their understanding and teaching. " We believe every word of the Bible…literally." I have heard those words spoken by many non Catholics but when it comes time to take the words literally…what happens…" This is a hard saying…who can accept." and they walk away…go figure.
Anybody who can explain this …please do.

 

[po18guy]

Just because something is older or been around longer doesn’t necessarily make it true. Likewise, the fact that many ppl believe “it” doesn’t make it true either. If that were the case then, Judaism should be more true than Christianity because it has been around for a longer period of time. Even Jesus Himself was a Jew - so that also should give credence to Judaism.

My point is that while you may be correct in your assertion that the bread and wine are literally the body and blood of Christ (I’m neither agreeing or disagreeing with you), the justification of your position is weak/faulty.

I apologize for this post being totally off subject, but I didn’t feel I could let this one slip by.

shalom

I didn’t check your profile. Are you Christian? If so, isn’t what Christ taught and the early church practiced to be valued above man’s recent inventions? This tradition is not a tradition of man. It was established by Christ and handed on to the Apostles, who handed it on, et cetera. I cannot help you if you reject this for some worldly reason.

This is precisely the point of the post. To reject Jesus in the Eucharist is to reject Jesus. Period. This is a hard saying, but remains as true today as it ever was. Luther, out of disobedience and ego, did away with the priesthood, destroying much of the Apostolic tradition in Christendom. He did this by his own authority.

We have the choice to follow Christ and His teachings, or similar teachings formulated by man. For me, the choice is easy.

Christ’s peace.

 

[paidion]

I didn’t check your profile. Are you Christian? If so, isn’t what Christ taught and the early church practiced to be valued above man’s recent inventions? This tradition is not a tradition of man. It was established by Christ and handed on to the Apostles, who handed it on, et cetera. I cannot help you if you reject this for some worldly reason.

This is precisely the point of the post. To reject Jesus in the Eucharist is to reject Jesus. Period. This is a hard saying, but remains as true today as it ever was. Luther, out of disobedience and ego, did away with the priesthood, destroying much of the Apostolic tradition in Christendom. He did this by his own authority.

We have the choice to follow Christ and His teachings, or similar teachings formulated by man. For me, the choice is easy.

Christ’s peace.

Po:

Jesus celebrated Channukah (see John 10) and the Passover (several times noted through out the NT) as well as other holidays. If such traditions are valued how come these have been largely abandoned by the Church (RC & non-RC)?

 

[paidion]

po:
you asked:
"isn’t what Christ taught and the early church practiced to be valued above man’s recent inventions? "

In my previous quick read, I missed “recent” inventions…to what precisely were you referring?

I was trying to assert that the “form” of the argument in the previous post was faulty, not necessarily its contents.

I would also like a serious answer (from anyone) on why certain things are “valued traditions”, but other things are not. (Ex.: in previous post I asked why observances of Channukah and Passover, etc. are largely ignored by many Christians when Jesus Himself celebrated them. Shouldn’t Christians follow His example?)

 

[paidion]

I also wonder why Jesus would have “out of the blue” started a whole practice that would have been seen as totally vile and against the Levitical code. To eat the blood of anything was an abomination to a Jew. Why would He do a “180” like that? To what purpose?

I’ve not seen anything on this forum that really answers this question.

I’m not trying to disrespect anyone’s beliefs. I’m really trying to get some sort of a handle on this.

 

[ralphinal]

I also wonder why Jesus would have “out of the blue” started a whole practice that would have been seen as totally vile and against the Levitical code. To eat the blood of anything was an abomination to a Jew. Why would He do a “180” like that? To what purpose?

I’ve not seen anything on this forum that really answers this question.

I’m not trying to disrespect anyone’s beliefs. I’m really trying to get some sort of a handle on this.

I will try to help, but I cannot promise that I will answer all of your questions.

As to why we do not celebrate Channukah, I think it has more to do with what Channukah is. As it commemorates the re-dedication of the Temple, when the oil lasted longer than it should have, Christians who no longer believe in the need for Temple sacrifices have no need to celebrate the Temple at all. Other holidays have been replaced through the evolution of the Faith. For example, Passover became Easter. The Passover meal became the Mass. As our understanding of God and his relationship with man changed, so did the holy days of the Faith. Interestingly, Easter corresponds to Passover and Pentecost became Pentecost (same day, different feast).

As far as why “drink his blood,” I think that you are onto it with the Levitical code. The Ancients believed that the blood of an animal contained its life-force. To consume the blood was to “take in the spirit” of the animal. Jesus knew that this meaning would be heard by the Jews, in other words, they would think that they would be making his spirit a part of themselves. This is my thought, but it may not be 100% correct. The blood sealed the passover homes from the angel of death so there is that aspect as well.

Remember that Jesus knew that he was to give them an un-bloody, non-canibalistic way to eat his flesh and drink his blood. The people who left did not know it, though.

 

[paidion]

Ralphinal:

Thanks for your reply…

As far as Channukah goes, I can see where folks might get the idea that it was about the Temple, but it had more to do with dedication (hence the name “The Feast of Dedication”). It was more about the great miracle that happened there after the Maccabees kicked out the bad guys (pardon the exteme paraphrase) and re-dedicated the Temple. They only had enough oil for one day, but the lamp burned for eight. The miracle has more to do with G-d and His preserving His people through His mighty hand than it has to do with a building. Even though the Temple no longer exists, this festival is still celebrated because of the testimony to G-d’s Faithfulness.

I believe I understand what you’re saying about some of the other festivals (but I’m not sure about the different Pentecosts … I didn’t know there were different versions of it). What I don’t understand is why there would be a need to change what was “an everlasting ordinance” (in the case of Passover) - especially when Jesus Himself celebrated it on several occasions (as recorded in the Gospels).

Why would something like Passover, having been observed in much the same way over many hundreds of years, have to morph into something completely different? Seems it would have a lot more impact in the original context: G-d bringing His people out of Egypt/bondage and G-d bring His people out of bondage (to sin) through the Lamb.

Why was the morphing of the holy days necessary?

 

[Peitho]

ralphinal:
I am new to this forum so please excuse my ignorance. At no time do I mean disrespect, but understanding.

A friend of mine who is a strong RC and was raised RC doesn’t feel that his parents are “saved” (even though growing up they attended mass every Sunday and were members of a Parish). Neither one of his parents have attended mass in over three decades, and this friend’s father has been diagnosed with acute leukemia. This friend has asked me to go over and talk to his father about the Messiah and Life after death. He knows I have great faith in G-D, and have put my life in G-D’s hands.

Most theological views of the RCs I can agree with; however, there are a few that make no sense. For me to talk with this gentleman I would like to first get some sort of understanding of the interpretation of John 6:48-58. If the RCs take this to mean that the Passover meal was a cannibalistic meal, then why not take John 15:1-11 to continue with this thought: we abide in Messiah so therefore by the RCs definition with this thought we would be eating ourselves.

Once again, I’m not being disrespectful; but, trying to illustrate the how absurd this sounds to me. I understand the fullness of the Passover meal and how the Messiah came to fulfill the Passover. Just like the Angel of Death Passed over the houses that had the doorposts painted with the blood of the lamb so those that have accepted the sacrifice of the One True Passover Lame (Messiah) and have the blood over the doorposts of their hearts they will have eternal life. John 3:16,17; Rev. 3:20

 

[ralphinal]

Ralphinal:

Thanks for your reply…

As far as Channukah goes, I can see where folks might get the idea that it was about the Temple, but it had more to do with dedication (hence the name “The Feast of Dedication”). It was more about the great miracle that happened there after the Maccabees kicked out the bad guys (pardon the exteme paraphrase) and re-dedicated the Temple. They only had enough oil for one day, but the lamp burned for eight. The miracle has more to do with G-d and His preserving His people through His mighty hand than it has to do with a building. Even though the Temple no longer exists, this festival is still celebrated because of the testimony to G-d’s Faithfulness.

I believe I understand what you’re saying about some of the other festivals (but I’m not sure about the different Pentecosts … I didn’t know there were different versions of it). What I don’t understand is why there would be a need to change what was “an everlasting ordinance” (in the case of Passover) - especially when Jesus Himself celebrated it on several occasions (as recorded in the Gospels).

Why would something like Passover, having been observed in much the same way over many hundreds of years, have to morph into something completely different? Seems it would have a lot more impact in the original context: G-d bringing His people out of Egypt/bondage and G-d bring His people out of bondage (to sin) through the Lamb.

Why was the morphing of the holy days necessary?

I am sorry, but I did not speak clearly on the Channukah issue. You are 100% correct. Since we have no need for the temple, we see no need to celebrate the dedication.

Jesus became the passover lamb, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. As such, we are freed from the slavery of sin. AS such, we see Passover as a prefiguration of Christ’s sacrafice and because of this, we only celebrate it in its complete form.

I think that the Holy Days changed because the old law was fulfilled and we are under a new covenant.

 

[ralphinal]

ralphinal:
I am new to this forum so please excuse my ignorance. At no time do I mean disrespect, but understanding.

A friend of mine who is a strong RC and was raised RC doesn’t feel that his parents are “saved” (even though growing up they attended mass every Sunday and were members of a Parish). Neither one of his parents have attended mass in over three decades, and this friend’s father has been diagnosed with acute leukemia. This friend has asked me to go over and talk to his father about the Messiah and Life after death. He knows I have great faith in G-D, and have put my life in G-D’s hands.

Most theological views of the RCs I can agree with; however, there are a few that make no sense. For me to talk with this gentleman I would like to first get some sort of understanding of the interpretation of John 6:48-58. If the RCs take this to mean that the Passover meal was a cannibalistic meal, then why not take John 15:1-11 to continue with this thought: we abide in Messiah so therefore by the RCs definition with this thought we would be eating ourselves.

Once again, I’m not being disrespectful; but, trying to illustrate the how absurd this sounds to me. I understand the fullness of the Passover meal and how the Messiah came to fulfill the Passover. Just like the Angel of Death Passed over the houses that had the doorposts painted with the blood of the lamb so those that have accepted the sacrifice of the One True Passover Lame (Messiah) and have the blood over the doorposts of their hearts they will have eternal life. John 3:16,17; Rev. 3:20

Ok, let me try to help. Let me start by saying that I feel no disrespect from your question.

Now, why are we not eating ourselves? We must see that at times different ways of describing things are used. For example, the Church is described as the Body of Christ. It is also called the Bride of Christ. Is Jesus marrying himself? No, the two descriptions are used to show two different aspects of the Church.

Now, the inverse of what you said IS a Catholic understanding. By consuming Christ in the Euchirist, we are joining ourselves to eachother. It is one of the Sacraments that join and connect the Church.

Even if you do not accept or understand the Catholic view, there are many parts of our faith that we should share. I cannot speak on anyone’s salvation, but the fact that they do not go to church indicates that they are lapsed and I would eb concerned for their souls. I would hope that they understand the forgiveness of God and God’s desire that all should be saved. I do not know what denomination that you are, but I would hope that you understand that it is through the suffering, death, and ressurection of Christ that we may find salvation.

I would be more than happy to discuss this with you, but we need to confine it to one part at a time. This is a bigger topic than you realize.

 

[Peitho]

As far as Channukah goes, I can see where folks might get the idea that it was about the Temple, but it had more to do with dedication (hence the name “The Feast of Dedication”). It was more about the great miracle that happened there … Even though the Temple no longer exists, this festival is still celebrated because of the testimony to G-d’s Faithfulness.

Paidion:
You are correct, the celebration of Channukah isn’t to emphasis the Temple; but to remember the Great Miracle that G-D performed. It is also a remembrance of G-D’s Faithfulness to all of us.

The other portion of the topic we could discuss; but, if someone could direct me towards the appropriate thread I would carry this on further (ie … discussion about biblical feasts and celebrations).

G-D Bless

 

[Peitho]

Ok, let me try to help. Let me start by saying that I feel no disrespect from your question.

Now, why are we not eating ourselves? We must see that at times different ways of describing things are used. For example, the Church is described as the Body of Christ. It is also called the Bride of Christ. Is Jesus marrying himself? No, the two descriptions are used to show two different aspects of the Church.

Now, the inverse of what you said IS a Catholic understanding. By consuming Christ in the Euchirist, we are joining ourselves to eachother. It is one of the Sacraments that join and connect the Church.

Even if you do not accept or understand the Catholic view, there are many parts of our faith that we should share. I cannot speak on anyone’s salvation, but the fact that they do not go to church indicates that they are lapsed and I would eb concerned for their souls. I would hope that they understand the forgiveness of God and God’s desire that all should be saved. I do not know what denomination that you are, but I would hope that you understand that it is through the suffering, death, and ressurection of Christ that we may find salvation.

I would be more than happy to discuss this with you, but we need to confine it to one part at a time. This is a bigger topic than you realize.

ralphinal:

Thank you very much for your candid response. I do fully understand this is a large topic, and have ben ministering and learning since I was a child; but, still have much more to learn. It seems the older I get the more I lack understanding.

I would whole-heartedly agree with your comments, including your statements about the Eucharist. I don’t see how your statement would be viewed as cannibalism, as has most explanations of the Eucharist by many RCs I’ve heard (regarding John 6:48-58). Just like in John 15 when the Messiah states that we abide in Him and He in Us, John is stating how we are being taken care of by the Caretaker. He is not saying that you and I are physically being grafted together into a single body; but spiritually we are grafted and part of the same vine and are partaking of the same nutrients provided by our Father in Heaven.

Thank you for your time. I will continue asking some questions regarding the RC faith. My intent is to steer the gentleman I am asked to talk with towards a Parish.

 

[po18guy]

Po:

Jesus celebrated Channukah (see John 10) and the Passover (several times noted through out the NT) as well as other holidays. If such traditions are valued how come these have been largely abandoned by the Church (RC & non-RC)?

His suffering, death and resurrection brought to completion the new and everlasting covenant between God and man. Thus, “when the perfect arrives, the imperfect passes away” (1 Corinthians 13:10). Christ is the perfect, and what he commanded is to be obeyed, to the best of our ability, in order to strive toward perfection. All of the Hebrew celebrations were of the fourth covenant. Christ is the fifth and final.

Thus, he also proclaimed all foods clean, even though the Mosaic law had forbid many of them. This is not contradiction, it is the very fulfillment of the new covenant. Further evidence of this is when Christ commanded the cleansed leper to show himself to the Priests and offer what Moses prescribed for his cleansing. Christ not only announced the new covenant, he was and is the new covenant. It became final, for all time, when he paid the price for our sin.

 

[ralphinal]

ralphinal:

Thank you very much for your candid response. I do fully understand this is a large topic, and have ben ministering and learning since I was a child; but, still have much more to learn. It seems the older I get the more I lack understanding.

I would whole-heartedly agree with your comments, including your statements about the Eucharist. I don’t see how your statement would be viewed as cannibalism, as has most explanations of the Eucharist by many RCs I’ve heard (regarding John 6:48-58). Just like in John 15 when the Messiah states that we abide in Him and He in Us, John is stating how we are being taken care of by the Caretaker. He is not saying that you and I are physically being grafted together into a single body; but spiritually we are grafted and part of the same vine and are partaking of the same nutrients provided by our Father in Heaven.

Thank you for your time. I will continue asking some questions regarding the RC faith. My intent is to steer the gentleman I am asked to talk with towards a Parish.

Actually, I was only dealing with one aspect of your question. I would eventually sound as bad as anyone, but I can explain it fairly well. Feel free to pm me if I can ever be of service. God bless you.