What is your view on these verses?

[Sy_Noe]

How do you know that Christ was not trying to help them discern who he saw himself as; namely his words and doctrine were what he was, and eating of the doctrine he espoused would lead to life? Why does he say the flesh profiteth nothing? Nada zip zilch? It’s almost as if he was highlighting the meaning behind his previous bread of life speech. So mainly why would I want to eat of that which will profit me nothing?

Hi God_I_Love, I perhaps am of the unusual perspective here in that I have always been able to understand both viewpoints. I understand completely where you’re coming from. Christ had not died yet at the Last Supper so he would have been speaking figuratively and symbolically. And in Jn 6 I believe you’re saying Christ was saying to “eat”, to consume the belief that He was going to be giving up His body and blood for our sins. And He would be present with us in Spirit. And those that walked were actually the ones still hung up on the literal. They kept thinking Christ was being literal when Christ was really speaking figuratively and they didn’t understand that.

I also understand as I think it was Emily2014 who said she accepts Catholic teaching on the Eucharist by belief and in faith and does this unquestionably.

So I’m not sure we can really know for sure other than by faith and belief. No matter which view we take. Both can’t be right obviously as is the case with many matters of faith. Catholics believe they know. Others believe differently about what Christ was saying. And in the end I think it really just comes down to a matter of faith as to what we believe. I think all any of us can truly do is to strive to journey in faith to the best of our understanding. And in the end to trust in His understanding of our finite minds and of our hearts and in His love and mercy for us.

Peace be with you as we all walk by faith. Not by sight. And may the love of God always remain within your heart. God bless!

 

[Noya]

''But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you? 63 If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? 64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life. ‘’ John 6:62-64

The disciples were just murmuring about eating his flesh and blood.

They were murmuring about his soul going.

Fortunately Jesus cleared it up, and framed the truth, that all spirits cause life.

 

[God_I_Love]

My view is that Jesus has just said YOUR flesh will not profit from the Eucharist, YOUR flesh will still die its natural course. But the soul (the immaterial aspect of man) will profit because that soul will have spirit and life from the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

Why on earth do you think Jesus would say doing A would produce B but then turn around and say it doesn’t?

Look at the verse. He is saying that in and of itself, without the spirit, flesh is useless. Now the reason he focused on eating the flesh was because of the Old Law. He was showing them why it was wrong and that they needed to switch how they viewed things if they wanted life (through his Spirit). This is what Paul talks about when he says Christ was a stumbling block that they couldn’t get handle (1 Cor 1:23). He was the cornerstone that they (the builders ie jews) rejected (Ps 118:22). Because they viewed things carnally instead of through belief in Christ. It is his WORDS that are truth and life and by abiding in his words we abide in Him and through his words he abides in us. That’s the message here. ‘‘7"If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.’’ (John 15:7) Notice here he again emphasizes that him abiding with us is through His doctrine/words (his spirit, which is his ‘‘flesh and blood’’)

 

[God_I_Love]

Are you suggesting that because Jesus ascended bodily into heaven, we can receive his flesh in the Eucharist?

Or are you trying to say that it is the Spirit who gives life and NOT the Eucharist?

Maybe the real question to be addressed is: What do you think happens at the consecration during mass?

I’m suggesting that when we receive the Holy Spirit, which would not have come unless Christ ascended, we receive life from Christ’s Spirit. And any view of the apostles account suggests the same. So your second question yes, the Spirit gives life. Christ’s words are that by which the Spirit comes to indwell within us. Read John 15:7. His words are how he abides in us. As for your third question let’s say that when the priest says :This is my body, the Host becomes Christ’s flesh. And when he says: This is my blood, the wine becomes Christ’s blood. Where is the Spirit, which is the manifesting of our hope? If by consumption of the Eucharist you receive Christ’s Spirit then why is it that upon hearing the doctrine of Christ by the apostles many received the Holy Spirit? Now so we need to receive it again and again? day after day? Does it leave us? I’m trying to connect the NECESSITY of the Eucharist in regards to eternal life. Because I’m under the notion it is the Holy Spirit within us that will raise us up on the last day (Holy Spirit being Christ) ‘‘11But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.’’ Rom 8:11

 

[God_I_Love]

Jn 6:61-64
Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said this to them, “Does this offend you? What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit [of God[ gives life [wisdom, insight into spiritual truths]; the flesh [the natural mind: intellect, reason] counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe.”

Some of the disciples listening to Jesus fail to see the spiritual truths He is revealing because they are not listening with the Spirit of God but trying to reason this out with their natural human intellects.

This fails because the rational mind cannot grasp eating Jesus’ real flesh and drinking his real blood. Thus, they cannot believe what Jesus is foretelling about the institution of the Eucharist because it is beyond their comprehension.

+++

Now, imagine the scene: Jesus has been teaching a crowd, and many of them have gotten up to leave because they could not or would not accept his words. In rejecting his teaching, they rejected the one who gave it and turned their backs on the savior of the world. Thus, their souls were at risk of eternal separation from God. Jesus came to seek and save what was lost; therefore, if these disciples had a simple misunderstanding of the metaphorical language he had used that might cause them to spend eternity in Hell, Jesus would have corrected their error. But we do not see him chasing them down the road saying, “Wait, everyone. I think there’s been a misunderstanding … let me explain what I meant.” Jesus could not correct a misunderstanding because there had been none.

Instead, he watched sadly as they departed and then turned to the Twelve, the closest of his disciples, and put the question directly to them: “What about you? Are you leaving too?” In doing so, Jesus was risking everything he had been working for since he had first called Simon and Andrew to follow him by the shore of the Sea of Galilee. If the Twelve had abandoned him at this crucial moment, Jesus would have had to begin again with a new group of Apostles to whom he would entrust his teachings and upon whom he would build his church. By God’s grace, Simon Peter, the first among the Apostles, responded in faith acknowledging that Jesus is the Holy One of God and accepting this difficult teaching.

Ok firstly he was addressing the main grumbling by the Jews, whom could not accept that this man claimed to be from Heaven. They also could not accept that they must literally consume his flesh. So when his disciples also questioned by saying, ‘‘this saying is hard, who can handle it’’ Christ was showing them 1) You will believe when I am ascended. Issue number one addressed. 2) The Spirit gives life. The flesh doesn’t. (btw ‘‘the’’ in Greek can also be translated as ‘‘this’’). Where is his Spirit? Where is life? The words he speaks. ''MY WORDS are spirit and life. Meaning 1) His words contained his Spirit, AND his words were life. Issue number two addressed. Now hearing this many walked away because essentially he was saying that listening to him would give them life. And they wanted a physical manifestation of that, which is because of the Old Law. So he let’s them walk knowing who did not believe (by belief in him life is attained). Now look at what Peter says as soon as this explantion is given and Christ asks the twelve ‘‘will you also go?’’ (clearly Christ knew they wouldn’t based on verses 64-65) And what is the first thing Peter says? ‘‘Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the WORDS of eternal life.’’

 

[God_I_Love]

Have not had a chance to read all the responses, so if anyone has already said this my apologies.

Notice before this verse He says “my flesh” repeatedly. In this verse He just says “the flesh”. Why is that? Because He is clearly not talking about His flesh here.

If His flesh profit nothing, does the resurrection of His flesh profit nothing also? What about the crucifixion of His flesh?

The word used for ‘‘the’’ in Greek can also be translated as ‘‘this’’

ο o,ra {ho}

1. the 2) this, that, these, etc.

The resurrection of his flesh, by his spirit (which is what did the resurrecting), is our proof that His Spirit gives us life everlasting. His crucifixion (which I addressed earlier) was what was necessary to take his place at the right hand of God and put to shame the powers of the age. ‘‘His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms,’’ (Eph 3:10)
‘‘14having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him.’’ (Col 2:14-15)

 

[TimothyH]

Look at the verse. He is saying that in and of itself, without the spirit, flesh is useless. Now the reason he focused on eating the flesh was because of the Old Law. He was showing them why it was wrong and that they needed to switch how they viewed things if they wanted life (through his Spirit). This is what Paul talks about when he says Christ was a stumbling block that they couldn’t get handle (1 Cor 1:23). He was the cornerstone that they (the builders ie jews) rejected (Ps 118:22). Because they viewed things carnally instead of through belief in Christ. It is his WORDS that are truth and life and by abiding in his words we abide in Him and through his words he abides in us. That’s the message here. ‘‘7"If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.’’ (John 15:7) Notice here he again emphasizes that him abiding with us is through His doctrine/words (his spirit, which is his ‘‘flesh and blood’’)

The “useless flesh” is a reference to the disciple’s flesh and not Jesus’ flesh.

In saying “flesh is useless” Jesus is telling the disciples that their human “flesh” is powerless to discern and comprehend what he is saying.

Jesus is telling the disciples that their eyes will see only bread, that their lips will taste only wine, that their human sense of reason will not be able to fully comprehend what he is now starting to reveal to them and what he will fully reveal on the night before he is to enter into his Passion.

We must rely on Jesus’ words which are spirit and life to discern the Body and Blood of Jesus in the Eucharist. Only when we trust what he has revealed to us are we able. We cannot rely on our own flesh to do it.

-Tim-

 

[God_I_Love]

The “useless flesh” is a reference to the disciple’s flesh and not Jesus’ flesh.

In saying “flesh is useless” Jesus is telling the disciples that their human “flesh” is powerless to discern and comprehend what he is saying.

Jesus is telling the disciples that their eyes will see only bread, that their lips will taste only wine, that their human sense of reason will not be able to fully comprehend what he is now starting to reveal to them and what he will fully reveal on the night before he is to enter into his Passion.

We must rely on Jesus’ words which are spirit and life to discern the Body and Blood of Jesus in the Eucharist. Only when we trust what he has revealed to us are we able. We cannot rely on our own flesh to do it.

-Tim-

And how do you know it is only referencing the disciples and not Jesus’s flesh? I think I gave a pretty clear interpretation. Look at the problems the Jews had upon hearing his sermon (I would read all of Ch 6 if you haven’t), and then look at Jesus’s response. Then look at Peter’s response. It seem quite clear that his words are the Spirit that quickeneth (give life too). And it is by this Spirit that we must be reborn John 3:5. No man can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. We are already born in the flesh and since the fall we have been spiritually dead. It wasn’t until Christ came that life entered again, THROUGH His Spirit. A rebirth. But first we must drink of the waters he Gives before we can receive his Spirit.’‘14 But the water that I will give him, shall become in him a fountain of water, springing up into life everlasting.’’ John 4:14. (Note the words springing up INTO) First the water of his doctrine which then, upon drinking of it, we can receive The Spirit. It is then we enter the kingdom of God. Look at what Paul says about this process. ‘‘9but just as it is written, “THINGS WHICH EYE HAS NOT SEEN AND EAR HAS NOT HEARD, AND which HAVE NOT ENTERED THE HEART OF MAN, ALL THAT GOD HAS PREPARED FOR THOSE WHO LOVE HIM.” 10For to us God revealed them through the Spirit;’’ 1 Cor 2:9. Meaning he already had a taste, through Christ’s Spirit, of the things God had prepared in His kingdom.
Now is it possible that Christ could have meant that His Flesh and Blood were in His Spirit and words? Possible is all I’m asking

 

[God_I_Love]

The “useless flesh” is a reference to the disciple’s flesh and not Jesus’ flesh.

In saying “flesh is useless” Jesus is telling the disciples that their human “flesh” is powerless to discern and comprehend what he is saying.

Jesus is telling the disciples that their eyes will see only bread, that their lips will taste only wine, that their human sense of reason will not be able to fully comprehend what he is now starting to reveal to them and what he will fully reveal on the night before he is to enter into his Passion.

We must rely on Jesus’ words which are spirit and life to discern the Body and Blood of Jesus in the Eucharist. Only when we trust what he has revealed to us are we able. We cannot rely on our own flesh to do it.

-Tim-

Also if His words are Spirit, and I ‘‘eat’’ of His words, Do I not also at that same time consume His Flesh and Blood? Only if they are indissoluble

 

[Duane1966]

Also if His words are Spirit, and I ‘‘eat’’ of His words, Do I not also at that same time consume His Flesh and Blood? Only if they are indissoluble

Nope. You don’t. You hear his words. You can stretch and bend them to try and make them say what you want them to say, but It fails. And the Spirit may dwelleth in you, but not His body, the way it does for the Catholics and the Orthodox. Does He ever say eat My words?

Also isn’t the word John uses “trogo”? According to a Protestant website, trogo means to “gnaw”, and is almost always associated with physical food (notice not spiritual food), so “trogo my flesh” is not metaphorical here. The Jews were murmuring here because He now was saying drink My blood. The drinking of any blood was strictly forbidden. When Peter says where will we go, you have the words of everlasting life, he is saying “we don’t understand it yet, but when the time comes we will eat and drink of you.”

The funny thing is that so many of His disciples walked away because they could not, or would not wrap their minds around this issue. And many of His “followers” are the same way today.

 

[God_I_Love]

Nope. You don’t. You hear his words. You can stretch and bend them to try and make them say what you want them to say, but It fails. And the Spirit may dwelleth in you, but not His body, the way it does for the Catholics and the Orthodox. Does He ever say eat My words?

Also isn’t the word John uses “trogo”? According to a Protestant website, trogo means to “gnaw”, and is almost always associated with physical food (notice not spiritual food), so “trogo my flesh” is not metaphorical here. The Jews were murmuring here because He now was saying drink My blood. The drinking of any blood was strictly forbidden. When Peter says where will we go, you have the words of everlasting life, he is saying “we don’t understand it yet, but when the time comes we will eat and drink of you.”

The funny thing is that so many of His disciples walked away because they could not, or would not wrap their minds around this issue. And many of His “followers” are the same way today.

So if I have the Spirit of Christ in me as Paul did and the early Christians (and let’s also remember Peter read all of Paul’s writings) mentioned here ‘‘9However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. 10If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.…’’ Rom 8:9 So if Christ is in me then do I have all of Christ, or only part of him? Is Christ’s Spirit Separate from His flesh and blood?

Now how do I get Christ’s Spirit? ''44While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. ‘’ Acts 10:44

 

[Darryl_B]

When Jesus says “the words I have spoken to you are spirit and life”, he does not mean his words are the spirit and life themselves, but rather that the things he has just said are about, are concerning spirit and life. One does not “digest” words, although it is however true that modern protestantism in its search for understanding its distance from the past, has chosen to believe that reading the Bible and hearing a preacher expound thus and thus is a means of absorption.

As anyone in the audience would know from being Jewish, the life of the body is in the blood, and the blood is in the flesh, and it is the application of that blood that atones. At the Last Supper (which should really be termed the First Supper) where the Eucharistic meal was first instigated it was a Passover, where the blood was applied against the destroyer and the flesh of the lamb was eaten.

If I counted up the number of saints in the Old Testament who had the Holy Spirit with them, I see nothing new in your version of the New Testament, the advent and ascension of Jesus Christ were certainly not a requirement for the Holy Spirit to work in people.

In other words the third person has always been there and accessible, but it is the second person that is required according to the second person Himself.

The Holy Spirit will lead you to the Son, and the Son will lead you to the Father.

 

[God_I_Love]

When Jesus says “the words I have spoken to you are spirit and life”, he does not mean his words are the spirit and life themselves, but rather that the things he has just said are about, are concerning spirit and life. One does not “digest” words, although it is however true that modern protestantism in its search for understanding its distance from the past, has chosen to believe that reading the Bible and hearing a preacher expound thus and thus is a means of absorption.

As anyone in the audience would know from being Jewish, the life of the body is in the blood, and the blood is in the flesh, and it is the application of that blood that atones. At the Last Supper (which should really be termed the First Supper) where the Eucharistic meal was first instigated it was a Passover, where the blood was applied against the destroyer and the flesh of the lamb was eaten.

If I counted up the number of saints in the Old Testament who had the Holy Spirit with them, I see nothing new in your version of the New Testament, the advent and ascension of Jesus Christ were certainly not a requirement for the Holy Spirit to work in people.

In other words the third person has always been there and accessible, but it is the second person that is required according to the second person Himself.

The Holy Spirit will lead you to the Son, and the Son will lead you to the Father.

So when Jesus Says ‘‘my words are Spirit and life’’ He is actually saying ‘‘my words are not spirit and life but they will tell you about spirit and life’’. Seems illogical to assume the truth would contradict himself like that. And it also fails to answer fundamental questions that I purported above:

1. When the Holy Spirit is in me, is Christ in me as Paul stated in Rom 8:9?
2. If the scriptures are infallible, as posited by the Catholic Church, I would assume your answer would be yes; The next question would be how much of Christ is in me? All of Him? Or only part of Him?

Now the second issue you highlighted is that Christ’s advent and ascension was not a requirement for the Holy Spirit to work in people. Then explain why Christ said in John 16:7 ‘‘But I tell you the truth: it is expedient to you that I go: for if I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.’’ Now in the old Testament the Holy Spirit was present. I do not deny that. But at the time of Christ, Christ was the only one with the Spirit of God within Him.

Now your last statement needs slight clarification. The Father will actually lead you to the Son ‘‘66 And he said: Therefore did I say to you, that no man can come to me, unless it be given him by my Father.’’ John 6:66, and the Son (whom abides in the Father) is whom will abide in you through the Holy Spirit (hence why it is referred to as ‘‘Christ’s Spirit’’ and ‘‘the Spirit within Christ’’). That same Spirit is Christ whom sees the Father, and they are one. They are indissoluble. So the indwelling of the Deity within us is the Holy Spirit and by that we can truly KNOW the Father, whom is Love. (And if you would like scripture for the last statement I can provide I’m just in a rush at the moment, I got a wedding to go too lol) Anyways I look forward to the reply, God bless

 

[Nelka]

John 6:53-55 Jesus replied to them: In all truth I tell you, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Anyone who does eat my flesh and drink my blood has eternal life, and I shall raise that person up on the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.

 

[Darryl_B]

It must be remembered when considering the writings of Paul, that he was mainly concerned about laying down a foundation of justification. The Eucharist was a given for Paul and in fact all members of the Christian community. However there were Jews who disagreed with what made a person justified in order to allow a person to partake of the Eucharist.

Some Jews were saying that a person must be circumcised and follow the cleansing laws of the OT. Paul at every opportunity corrected this, and it is probably succinctly said in Titus 3:5-8. Not by works done by us in righteousness (circumcision and cleansing of the Old Testament) but by baptism regeneration and renewal of Holy Spirit, and hence justified, in a position that we are right to partake of the Eucharist.

As I said earlier (though it was entirely ignored in the pursuit of citing verses out of contextual origin) The Holy Spirit will lead you to the Son, and the Son will lead you to the Father.

The baptism and confirmation born of water born of Spirit washing of regeneration renewal of Holy Spirit are the initiation of the individual to be able to partake at the table.

So with the continuation of Acts 2 we end with And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts, praising God.

The Holy Spirit initiation leads us to the Son, in the Eucharist, and the Son will lead souls to heaven, the Father.

The initiation is not sufficient of itself, but for some reason many read the writings of Paul and conceive a “been there done that” saved scenario without developing into the fulness of the Christian message. Initiation is not completion, it is only the beginning.

 

[God_I_Love]

It must be remembered when considering the writings of Paul, that he was mainly concerned about laying down a foundation of justification. The Eucharist was a given for Paul and in fact all members of the Christian community. However there were Jews who disagreed with what made a person justified in order to allow a person to partake of the Eucharist.

Some Jews were saying that a person must be circumcised and follow the cleansing laws of the OT. Paul at every opportunity corrected this, and it is probably succinctly said in Titus 3:5-8. Not by works done by us in righteousness (circumcision and cleansing of the Old Testament) but by baptism regeneration and renewal of Holy Spirit, and hence justified, in a position that we are right to partake of the Eucharist.

Now while I do see where you are going with this is fails to address the fundamental questions I highlighted before. And to sorta help reiterate: What is the Holy Spirit? Because by Paul’s accounts it dwells within us. It is the same Spirit that is in Christ.
‘‘But you are not in the flesh but in the spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his’’ Rom 8:9

Now another thing about this Spirit is that ‘’…the Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit, that we are the sons of God’’ Rom 8:16

So the Spirit is also something that we can know is within us because it ''gives testimony to our spirit". So in reference to the Eucharist, is this Spirit Christ? Because it is the same one that was within him, correct? Now if it isn’t, what is Christ then?

So in terms of righteousness and justification how does that occur? Through Christ Spirit. It is that Spirit that justifies us and gives us Christ’s righteousness. Catholic theology has a different term for a justified state, called sanctifying grace. It is the working of the Spirit of Christ, already within you, sanctifying you as a fire cleanses impurities from precious metals. But the Spirit of Christ is the one doing the justifying. Unless you think anyone but God himself can justify someone before him? He is the one giving us righteousness which we ourselves can never attain through our own actions (works).

As I said earlier (though it was entirely ignored in the pursuit of citing verses out of contextual origin) The Holy Spirit will lead you to the Son, and the Son will lead you to the Father.

The baptism and confirmation born of water born of Spirit washing of regeneration renewal of Holy Spirit are the initiation of the individual to be able to partake at the table.

So with the continuation of Acts 2 we end with And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts, praising God.

The Holy Spirit initiation leads us to the Son, in the Eucharist, and the Son will lead souls to heaven, the Father.

The initiation is not sufficient of itself, but for some reason many read the writings of Paul and conceive a “been there done that” saved scenario without developing into the fulness of the Christian message. Initiation is not completion, it is only the beginning.

Now I did not ignore what you said. And my verse was not out of context. It was showing how we are led to the Son. But what you said is not in line with a fuller understanding of the Scriptures (as far as my knowledge, however if you would cite verses or even Church Magisterium, I would happily take a look at it) I would like to know just where did you learn this sequence? Now I understand why you might assume this. But it is by the Father that Jesus came into this world. Had Jesus not come into this world (Which is illogical in and of itself because it was ordained and planned from before the foundation of the world by the Father) How would we receive His Spirit (who then teaches and guides and loves us)? How would the angels and Satan have been cast down from the heavenly realms where they ACCUSSED us, and listed our transgression against us; had He not taken it upon Himself, through His love for YOU, and for Me, and the entire world, to take away that power from them and HUMILIATE them for THIER usurpation of power that belonged only to God? Had God not been so Good we might still be in darkness and unaware of the joy and peace of His Spirit. Of His immense love. So it is by the Father, whom the Son abides in, That we receive the Spirit of God, sent by the Son, whom then illuminates us to who the Father is through the Son. That sentence you should examine carefully as it shows a deeper progression of that order.

 

[God_I_Love]

John 6:53-55 Jesus replied to them: In all truth I tell you, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Anyone who does eat my flesh and drink my blood has eternal life, and I shall raise that person up on the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.

This has been discussed earlier in the thread. However just a small tidbit (though please read previous responses if you wish to engage in the discussion), what is it that will raise us up on the last day? Christ’s Flesh and Blood? Or is it as Paul says here ‘‘And if the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead, dwell in you; [take note the next part] he that raised up Jesus Christ from the dead, shall quicken also your mortal bodies, because of his Spirit that dwelleth in you.’’ Rom 8:11

 

[Tantum_ergo]

GIL: Why do you persist in separating Christ’s Humanity from His Divinity?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Also, how do you explain, GIL, that for hundreds of years Christians (Christians who knew the Scriptures, Christians in the early days who knew the apostles, for heaven’s sake!) never ‘understood’ John 6 to be speaking ‘figuratively’ about Christ’s Flesh and Blood being His Soul and Divinity?

Wouldn’t you expect to see clear apostolic teaching carried on in unbroken fashion of a ‘symbolic only’ Eucharist as Christian teaching?

Why is it that we only see the clear apostolic, unbroken teaching as that of a literal "Flesh and Blood’ Eucharist? Were early Christians STUPID? Did the Holy Spirit neglect Christians for 1500 years until a few became ‘smart’ enough to grasp the teaching?

And if the above were the case, then how come these people went on to reject other Christian teachings? If the only thing ‘wrong’ in the Catholic Church was this Eucharist idea, then how come Protestants (whether Anglican, Lutheran, Baptist, Methodist, non denom, and everything in between) can’t agree among themselves on Scripture? How come only the Catholic (and Orthodox) Churches keep on holding to doctrine and state, “This is what God has taught”? How come so many Protestants come on saying, “God said >this< in Scripture, but it was years ago, and the people then weren’t so enlightened as they are, and it has become clear to our pastors, our scholars, and our lay people that God either only meant what Scripture says in the bad old days, or that He was misunderstood, so WE have decided that contrary to what Scripture says, TODAY God would WANT us to stop teaching >this< and to teach the opposite as true.”

It’s kind of hard to trust in a denomination which claims to love God, and to revere His word, but is constantly changing what it says His words are, or mean. . .especially when all the changes seem to be ‘reinforcing’ or ‘reinforced’ by secular people and groups. Aren’t we supposed, as human beings, to be conforming ourselves to God, and not ‘packaging’ Him to be more appealing to US?

 

[God_I_Love]

GIL: Why do you persist in separating Christ’s Humanity from His Divinity?

I do no such thing. Christ is fully human and fully God. Why do you insist on separating Christ’s Spirit From His Flesh and Blood?