I realize this is difficult for you to accept, but Christ was speaking of His own flesh. The flaw, once again, is interpreting scripture with a lack of foundation in the Tradition of the RC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
This is the difficulty that Sola Scripturist or Bible Only renditions encounter. Your interpretation above fails miserably. Doesn’t it seem the least bit strange that Christ would say, in John 6: 55 “He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life,” and as a consequence of that “hard” saying lose his following, and then seemingly making a 180 degree turn in thought? Why would Christ insist on the vulgar eating of human flesh and then turn around and say, “It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing.” Were the Apostles to understand this to mean that they were to eat his flesh but it wouldn’t bring them any understanding? Or were the apostles to understand this to mean not to eat his flesh; saying this right after, “eat my flesh”? To believe the latter would mean that Christ was schizophrenic. To believe the former would mean that Christ was addled. The third and correct meaning of this passage leads to the Eucharist.
Apostolic tradition is the living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit preserving the original intent of the Scripture. Looking at verse 63, in John 6, through the tradition of the Church we see a play on opposite meaning words, “sprit” and “flesh”. A literary technique allows us to picture a spiritual understanding as efficacious and the understanding through flesh as inefficacious. Still better, another way of saying it is that he, who receives understanding spiritually profits, and he receives understanding carnally, profits nothing. (Cf. St. Chrysostom on John, HOMILY XLVII)
“But what is, “understands carnally”? It is looking merely to what is before our eyes, without imagining anything beyond. This is understanding carnally. But we must not judge thus by sight, but must look into all mysteries with the eyes within. This is seeing spiritually. He that eateth not His flesh, and drinketh not His blood, hath no life in him. How then doth “the flesh profit nothing,” if without it we cannot live? Seest thou that the words, “the flesh profiteth nothing,” are spoken not of His own flesh, but of carnal hearing?” (Cf. St. Chrysostom on John, HOMILY XLVII)
Cannibalism doesn’t enter the discussion as transubstantiation, transforming from bread and wine to the essence of body and blood Christ, removes the objection of eating Christ’s flesh not having the intrinsic accidents of flesh. So in God’s infinite mercy He has provided every inducement for you to partake of the sacrament, and removed every objection.
JoeT
