Why would anyone want to be a Mormon or Jehovah Witnesses?

[TexanKnight]

Your mocking of my religion gets you nowhere. An honest reading of John 6 should make plain to everyone that it does not support the kind of interpretation you guys are trying to put on it.

Actually, it does. The fact you can;t understand it speaks volumes

 

[TexanKnight]

Why don’t you tell us what you think John 6:63 means, and support it with convincing exegesis—instead of shouting from the sidelines?

I think it means that the the physical eating of his flesh profiteth nothing, which is what some of his his disciples had misunderstood him as saying.

that is not what it says…but I understand your need to misread the Bible. To read it correctly, you would have to leave the LDS Church;

BTW, the thread on all his versions is still waiting for you. No need to be afraid

 

[TexanKnight]

I think that you guys are.

Really? We are not the ones following a con man who taught God was once a sinful man

 

[RebeccaJ]

So when Moses lifted up a brazen serpent in the wilderness, and told the Israelites who were bitten by the poisonous serpents to look upon the brazen serpent and they would be healed, that was also a prop?

I imagine you have a point, maybe you’d like to make it.

 

[RebeccaJ]

No; it is part of the context in which the Eucharist is taught.

Read again

 

[CyndiTo411]

Ok so lets say you are right for arguments sake. Now keep in mind Jesus has not yet said do this in memory of me, so why would any Christian practice giving communion if eating his flesh is really pointless as you interpret this verse? It seems pretty obvious Christ is not speaking of his flesh why would he contradict himself at this point and then say again at the last supper “this IS my body”? And I know you say its just a symbol because he said do this in rememberance of me but honestly that’s just a copout, give me solid proof actual words where He says its a symbol.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I thought you said, “This will be my last post on this issue.”

Dodging must be the latest favored Mormon response.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Your mocking of my religion gets you nowhere. An honest reading of John 6 should make plain to everyone that it does not support the kind of interpretation you guys are trying to put on it.

Funny, I see it is you mocking Catholic belief.

 

[TexanKnight]

Why don’t you tell us what you think John 6:63 means, and support it with convincing exegesis—instead of shouting from the sidelines?

I think it means that the the physical eating of his flesh profiteth nothing, which is what some of his his disciples had misunderstood him as saying.

lol…really?

**48 I am that bread of life.

49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.

50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.

60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?

61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?

62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.**

No…that is NOT what he says. He says clearly that HE is the bread. We must eat his flesh.

Then, take what He said in John and look at Matthew:

**26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.

27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.**

How can you see this ANY other way?

 

[eddie_too]

mathonihah,

how do you know that the spirit that testifies to you is the Holy Spirit? why could it not be an evil spirit?

 

[SpeSalvi]

That is an obvious Catholic misinterpretation John 6:63.

I think you’re forgetting that, before there WERE any other “interpretations” of sacred scripture the Catholic Church used tradition handed down from the apostles themselves to instruct the Body of Christ on Church doctrine.

It seems that you’re having to do mental gymnastics and needlessly go on the defensive to justify your position.

Would you mind reading the entire tract and showing me how the rest of that chapter is interpreted incorrectly so that the logical conclusion is NOT that Christ is talking about his literal flesh and blood? I’m very interested in how you interpret the rest of that to prove the LDS view.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Your mocking of my religion gets you nowhere. An honest reading of John 6 should make plain to everyone that it does not support the kind of interpretation you guys are trying to put on it.

It is not an honest reading to discount ten verses and magnify one. LDS don’t really seem to hold all of Christ’s words as useful. An honest reading would take all the verses together believing that Christ meant what He said about His flesh and reconcile it with the later verse. This is the Catholic approach and obviously not the LDS approach, focusing on just one verse is a shallow way to read scripture and results in a lightweight faith.

 

[TexanKnight]

It is not an honest reading to discount ten verses and magnify one. LDS don’t really seem to hold all of Christ’s words as useful. An honest reading would take all the verses together believing that Christ meant what He said about His flesh and reconcile it with the later verse. This is the Catholic approach and obviously not the LDS approach, focusing on just one verse is a shallow way to read scripture and results in a lightweight faith.

it also leads people to be susceptible to false prophets. Like Joseph Smith, Jim Jones, Ellen White, etc.

 

[mathonihah]

Ok so lets say you are right for arguments sake. Now keep in mind Jesus has not yet said do this in memory of me, so why would any Christian practice giving communion if eating his flesh is really pointless as you interpret this verse? It seems pretty obvious Christ is not speaking of his flesh why would he contradict himself at this point and then say again at the last supper “this IS my body”? And I know you say its just a symbol because he said do this in rememberance of me but honestly that’s just a copout, give me solid proof actual words where He says its a symbol.

Hyperbole or exaggerated form of speech is a common feature of oriental and Hebrew speech and culture. The Bible is full of it. Here are some typical examples from the New Testament:

“And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
“And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.” (Matt. 5:29–30)

“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
“Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
“Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” (Matt. 7:3–5)

“Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.” (Matt. 23:24)

“If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

“The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him.” (John 12:19)

“And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” (John 21:25).

It is used to emphasize an important point. In the case of Christ’s teachings regarding the Eucharist, the emphasis is that it is through the death and sufferings of Christ that salvation comes to us. That is the purpose of the hyperbole.

Jesus sometimes also deliberately used a provocative language in order to drive away disciples who were just hangers on, and did not have genuine faith in him. Here is an example:

“And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.
“And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.
“And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.
“Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.
“And another also said, Lord, I will follow thee; but let me first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house.
“And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” (Luke 9:57–62)

In the case of the Eucharistic teachings, however, the fact that the “flesh and blood” was not meant to be taken literally is amply demonstrated by John 6:63. Jesus said that in response to some of his disciples taking offense at his saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, and his blood to drink. The idea it conveys is that it is not meant to be taken literally.

Other passages, which teach that the rite is to be performed in remembrance of him, also confirm this. Paul for example gives the following instructions regarding the Eucharist:

“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:
“And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
“After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
“For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.” (1 Cor. 23–26)

Nowhere is it taught that the bread and wine are literally transformed into his flesh and blood. It is a hyperbole, and exaggerated form of speech. The emblems are a symbolic representation of his suffering and death on our behalf.

 

[mathonihah]

mathonihah,

how do you know that the spirit that testifies to you is the Holy Spirit? why could it not be an evil spirit?

Because it leads me to do good, and to what is good, and to believe in Jesus Christ.

 

[mathonihah]

I think you’re forgetting that, before there WERE any other “interpretations” of sacred scripture the Catholic Church used tradition handed down from the apostles themselves to instruct the Body of Christ on Church doctrine.

It seems that you’re having to do mental gymnastics and needlessly go on the defensive to justify your position.

Would you mind reading the entire tract and showing me how the rest of that chapter is interpreted incorrectly so that the logical conclusion is NOT that Christ is talking about his literal flesh and blood? I’m very interested in how you interpret the rest of that to prove the LDS view.

See my post #665.

 

[Stephen168]

Nowhere is it taught that the bread and wine are literally transformed into his flesh and blood.

It is taught by Christ as record by the Apostle John. It is also recorded in Christian history from the time of the Apostles. We also know from history it was Christian protesters during the 16th century that began to reject this teaching of Christ. Because Mormonism is a 19th century invention of Joseph Smith, it adopted the beliefs of the protesters. This is the main reason I know that Mormonism is an invention and not a restoration.

 

[mathonihah]

It is not an honest reading to discount ten verses and magnify one. LDS don’t really seem to hold all of Christ’s words as useful. An honest reading would take all the verses together believing that Christ meant what He said about His flesh and reconcile it with the later verse. This is the Catholic approach and obviously not the LDS approach, focusing on just one verse is a shallow way to read scripture and results in a lightweight faith.

It is not a numbers game. You can have a hundred verses saying one thing, and one verse at the end that modifies, or clarifies, the meaning of the rest.

 

[TexanKnight]

Hyperbole or exaggerated form of speech is a common feature of oriental and Hebrew speech and culture. The Bible is full of it. Here are some typical examples from the New Testament:

“And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
“And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.” (Matt. 5:29–30)

“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
“Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
“Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” (Matt. 7:3–5)

“Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.” (Matt. 23:24)

“If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

“The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him.” (John 12:19)

“And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” (John 21:25).

It is used to emphasize an important point. In the case of Christ’s teachings regarding the Eucharist, the emphasis is that it is through the death and sufferings of Christ that salvation comes to us. That is the purpose of the hyperbole.

Jesus sometimes also deliberately used a provocative language in order to drive away disciples who were just hangers on, and did not have genuine faith in him. Here is an example:

“And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.
“And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.
“And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.
“Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.
“And another also said, Lord, I will follow thee; but let me first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house.
“And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” (Luke 9:57–62)

In the case of the Eucharistic teachings, however, the fact that the “flesh and blood” was not meant to be taken literally is amply demonstrated by John 6:63. Jesus said that in response to some of his disciples taking offense at his saying that he would give them his flesh to eat, and his blood to drink. The idea it conveys is that it is not meant to be taken literally.

Other passages, which teach that the rite is to be performed in remembrance of him, also confirm this. Paul for example gives the following instructions regarding the Eucharist:

“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:
“And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
“After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
“For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.” (1 Cor. 23–26)

Nowhere is it taught that the bread and wine are literally transformed into his flesh and blood. It is a hyperbole, and exaggerated form of speech. The emblems are a symbolic representation of his suffering and death on our behalf.

lolol…I gave you the verses. You can’t read?

 

[TexanKnight]

Because it leads me to do good, and to what is good, and to believe in Jesus Christ.

that would be true, if you believed in THE Jesus Christ,

But since that “spirirt” led you to a false god…it MUST have been evil