st_felicity:
Yes. This is my experience in the Timeless union with Christ. I do not hunger nor thirst.
Thank you!
(1) You do realize that you’re applying a spiritual interpretation to verse 35, right? I think even you know that only a spiritual interpretation can be employed here, and therefore you too must succumb to a spiritual interpretation. And in so doing you are closer to agreeing with Jesus than you think when He told His chosen disciples, *“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing” *(i.e., physically eating and drinking anything can not impart eternal life; physically eating and drinking belongs only to the flesh and the flesh profits nothing); And for this reason He says; *“the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life” *(6:63). In other words they’re spiritual words addressed to the spirit, not the flesh. And it seems you agree.
(2) You can’t truthfully tell me that this is your personal (Timeless) “experience” since you do not dwell in that realm. You were born into this time/space continuum and it is not possible for you to actually “experience” anything else. Only by divine revelation (through the Scriptures) do you and I know about eternal realities, but neither of us have yet personally “experienced” them (Paul once “viewed” them). Paul, in his Epistles, speaks of “positional truths” which belong to all who are IN Christ through faith (example: Col. 1:3-4), but these are not for us to now “experience,” they’re the “food” of faith.
How this relates to never hungering and never thirsting: In my brief communion with God in the Eucharist–there is no hunger or thirst–because hunger and thirst are a function of a linier existence
But “felicity,” you partake of the “host” while in a “linear existence.” In fact, you yourself contend that in order for Christ to be eaten He too must, through the mystery transubstantiation, re-enter your “linear existence.” You yourself claim that the “host” becomes the actual, physical, body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ. The same body in which He was crucified. According to the doctrine of “transubstantiation” BOTH you and Christ, during the Mass, are experiencing this encounter in a time/space continuum and not a “Timeless union” where thirst and hunger do not exist.
You restrict your personal “experience” of no hunger and thirst to this “brief” communion with God “in the Eucharist.” But Jesus says he shall “NEVER” thirst. Never is never. Not just some brief, “timeless” encounter. Also, Jesus states in verse thirty-five that it is those who “come to Him” that shall not hunger - those who “believe” in Him that shall NEVER thirst. This is not said in the context of eating Him. This is spiritual language connected to personal faith. Therefore “hunger” and “thirst” must apply to “spiritual hunger” and “spiritual thirst.” In fact, even the interpretation YOU provide is a spiritual one, albeit within your “brief,” “timeless” encounter. Although your word “brief” incongruously is suitable only to the context of time.
In verse 54 Jesus states that He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood HAS ETERNAL LIFE. This too, obviously, must be understood in the same spiritual sense as verse 35, since the one who HAS (possesses) eternal life will physically die. But Jesus promises to raise him up on the last day (54b). This is in direct reference to the future resurrection of the body of all believers (see Rom. 8:23; 1 Cor. 15; 1 Jn. 3:2; cf. Col. 3:4). Eternal life is a spiritual reality now, a present spiritual “possession” for those who "come to the “Bread of Life” by faith (vs. 35). It is the reality of this possession that causes the believer to not spiritually “hunger,” to never spiritually “thirst” again. Christ is his “life” (Phil. 1:21) and his soul is completely satisfied knowing he HAS eternal life.
How this relates to the disciples who walked away: I cannot accept that Jesus allowed disciples to unwittingly damn themselves because He knew their ultimate destiny because Jesus was God who allowed Himself to be subject to this linear existence.
Oh!!! Now I see the reasoning behind your rebuttal (pun not intended). How do you come up with the idea that by walking away that day they were eternally damned? Certainly not from the text. Don’t read into the text something that is not there. You have no idea that some of those same Jewish men who walked away didn’t subsequently listen to, and believe, the words of Peter and the Apostles on the Day of Pentecost concerning the resurrection of Christ and the forgiveness of sins through faith in Him (Acts 2:I’D). No man was ever saved (from sin and judgment) by just following Christ and listening to His teachings during His earthly ministry. The “word of reconciliation” with God is in the context of the cross (2 Cor. 5:I8-21).
the world is full of sacrilegious stuff…let’s stay on the Eucharist though.
