The Lord Jesus Christ, God the Son, said
(From the NKJV)
Matthew 26: 26. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed it and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body.''
27. Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
28. "For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
I Cor 11: 27. Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup.
29. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
Questions…..
Do you believe what Jesus said that the consecrated bread and wine do become the body and blood of Him?
If not, why not?
:) Peace and kindness,:)
Fred (arcura)

Here we go again! Did Jesus speak in the present tense? Yes. Was His blood still in His veins? Yes. Was His body still in one piece? Yes. Simple logic or reason tells us the statement was symbolic.

With God is all things possible, yes,

Galveston1 ,
No that is in no way symbolic.
Jesus blessed then was holding and distributing the bread and wine that He said are His body and blood.
He also said to do this in remmebrance of me.
That is to say that the consecrated bread and wine are His body and blood.
The passage beginning from 1 Cor 11:27 affirms that if a person who partakes of it in and unworthy manner is GUILTY of the Body and Blood of Jesus Chrsit.
That IS telling us in another way that the consecrated bread and wine ARE the body and blood of Jesus of which he said those who partake of it He WILL raise them up on the last day.
He said that He is the bread of life and that His body is food INDEED and bis blood drink INDEED.
He did not say they were symbolic.
The word Jesus used "INDEED" does not mean symbolic it means the opposite of that.
I think you know that about INDEED.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galveston1

Here we go again! Did Jesus speak in the present tense? Yes.

---

John 6 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.

You might want to study your English tenses again. The words "I will give" are not in the present tense.

Quote:

---

Was His blood still in His veins? Yes. Was His body still in one piece? Yes.

---

But as He previously said, He wasn't ready to give them up yet. He said, "the bread that I will give is my flesh".

Quote:

---

Simple logic or reason tells us the statement was symbolic.

---

A true reading of the Chapter shows you that He was speaking in real terms. That is why the Jews and many of His disciples said, "this is a hard saying, who can take it." And they left.

Why? Because they believed He was speaking in real terms. Not in symbols.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria,
Exactly right.
I like the way you said that.
Fred

The Jews understood it literally, true. They misunderstood many things about Jesus. The Host is made of flour, looks like bread, and tastes like bread. It is then blessed by a priest and so becomes literal flesh. No wonder that Voltaire said that when a man enters a church, he must leave his intelligence at the door. His observation was correct, he just did not bother to look for the truth and dismissed Christianity and religion out of hand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galveston1

The Jews understood it literally, true. They misunderstood many things about Jesus. The Host is made of flour, looks like bread, and tastes like bread. It is then blessed by a priest and so becomes literal flesh. No wonder that Voltaire said that when a man enters a church, he must leave his intelligence at the door. His observation was correct, he just did not bother to look for the truth and dismissed Christianity and religion out of hand.

---

Is it that you don't believe in miracles? You don't believe in the Supernatural? Or you don't believe in the power of God's Word who created this universe from nothing?

1 Corinthians 1 21 For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world, by wisdom, knew not God, it pleased God, by the foolishness of our preaching, to save them that believe. 22 For both the Jews require signs, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: 23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness: 24 But unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Well : at least Voltaire made a valid point !

If a grown up enters a church, and is supposed to believe that watery wine is blood, and wafers are flesh, and both represent the blood and body of Christ, yes than that grown up has to leave his intelligence at the door.

:rolleyes:

Credendovidis,
I HAVE TO prove nothing.
I have a Christian faith and that is much MORE than JUST belief.
That sort of faith is far beyond belief; it is belief, trust and a KNOWING that those without faith can not comphrehnd.
As examples I do not just believe God exists, I know it.
I do not just believe that Jesus is God the Son who rose from the dead, I KNOW it to be true.
I also know that you want scientific proof of that and I know that you will not get it.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Fred : that's old hat !

Why don't you reply to what I stated in my post, instead of reacting to my signature lines ?

Of course you do not have to prove anything. But if you don't prove anything I am fully in my right to question whatever you and others believe to be "true"!!

You know very well that I am tolerant to whatever you or others believe to be "true".
What I oppose is the idea that whatever you and/or others believe is therefore reality.
The claim that it is reality has to be proved. Not what you believe !

Have tomorrow a nice day Fred (after a good night sleep ! )

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Credendovidis

Well : at least Voltaire made a valid point !

If a grown up enters a church, and is supposed to believe that watery wine is blood, and wafers are flesh, and both represent the blood and body of Christ, yes than that grown up has to leave his intelligence at the door.

:rolleyes:

---

From Galveston, that view is inconsistent with his/her belief in God's omnipotence.

From you, this view is consistent with your disbelief in miracles.

This is the point at which our faith means believing that which we don't see. But you said you had no problem with what we believe, right?

Sincerely,

De Maria

No, my view on the validity of trans-substantiation does not conflict with my faith in a miracle working God. I simply disagree with the Catholic understanding of the scripture involved. What is being taught is cannabilism and eating blood (you insist that it is LITERALLY the flesh and blood of Jesus). That conflicts with other Bible teaching, and the Bible is not contradictory, Cred notwithstanding.

It is not sound theology to take one scripture and build a doctrine around it. There will be supporting scriptures for every sound doctrine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galveston1

No, my view on the validity of trans-substantiation does not conflict with my faith in a miracle working God. I simply disagree with the Catholic understanding of the scripture involved. What is being taught is cannabilism and eating blood (you insist that it is LITERALLY the flesh and blood of Jesus). That conflicts with other Bible teaching, and the Bible is not contradictory, Cred notwithstanding.

---

I believe this teaching and I don't believe the Bible contradicts Itself.

I guess it's a matter of faith. Do you have enough faith to believe that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist? Most Christians (I don't know whether this includes you), Protestant or Catholic would say, "Yes!"

The difference is, those Protestants believe in a SPIRITUAL presence. Whereas Jesus did not say, "This bread is my spiritual flesh." He said, "this bread is my flesh".

Therefore, we believe that Jesus is truly present in the Holy Eucharist.

As for the charge of cannibalism. This is a tough one. Jesus is our Pasch (Our Passover):
1 Corinthians 5 7 Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened. For Christ our pasch is sacrificed.

He is the Lamb of God:
John 1 29 The next day, John saw Jesus coming to him, and he saith: Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who taketh away the sin of the world.

And the Passover Lamb is eaten:
Exodus 12 1 And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt: 2 This month shall be to you the beginning of months: it shall be the first in the months of the year. 3 Speak ye to the whole assembly of the children of Israel, and say to them: On the tenth day of this month let every man take a lamb by their families and houses. 4 But if the number be less than may suffice to eat the lamb, he shall take unto him his neighbour that joineth to his house, according to the number of souls which may be enough to eat the lamb.

Show me where Scripture contradicts?

However, the dietary laws remain forbidding the eating of any blood:

Genesis 9 3 And every thing that moveth and liveth shall be meat for you: even as the green herbs have I delivered them all to you: 4 Saving that flesh with blood you shall not eat.

Leviticus 3 17 By a perpetual law for your generations, and in all your habitations: neither blood nor fat shall you eat at all.

But all has been made clean:
Mark 7 18 And he saith to them: So are you also without knowledge? understand you not that every thing from without, entering into a man cannot defile him: 19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but goeth into the belly, and goeth out into the privy, purging all meats? 20 But he said that the things which come out from a man, they defile a man.

21 For from within out of the heart of men proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, 22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness.

So do you eat fat?

Quote:

---

It is not sound theology to take one scripture and build a doctrine around it. There will be supporting scriptures for every sound doctrine.

---

That is what I tell you guys all the time. You've got this thing against tradition because Jesus said,
Mark 7 8 For leaving the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men, the washing of pots and of cups: and many other things you do like to these.

But Scripture also says:
2 Thessalonians 2 14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

But you said you had no problem with what we believe, right?

---

Yes. I have no problem with that.
But what has that to do with what Voltaire stated? His point was totally valid!!

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Galviston1,
The Catholic teaching about the Eucharist depends on far more than a verse or two.
It depends on many verses in both the old and new Testaments.
In the old Testament is the many verses regarding the Passover when the blood of a flawless lamb is painted over door posts and the body of that lamb is eaten.
In the New Testament Christ gives us the Christian Passover, Himself, the flawless lamb of God to be consumed. No symbols but the real thing as he insisted repeatedly in several verses.
The Catholic teaching on that is bible based, anchored with MANY verses.
I hope you can understand that.
Keep in mind that Christ said that if you do not eat His flesh and drink His blood you have NO life in you, but if you do eat His flesh and drink His blood He WILL raise you up on the last day.
He said that when we do that we become ONE with Him.
For the sake of your soul, believe it.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Credendovidis

Yes. I have no problem with that.
But what has that to do with what Voltaire stated? His point was totally valid !!!

---

As I've stated before, in summary, we have reviewed the evidence for the truth of Church Teaching. Since we have learned that the Church teaches the truth in those doctrines, we can have faith in the others which we can't verify with observable evidence.

Therefore, Voltaire is wrong. One checks his hat at the door in believing Voltaire. But in believing the Church, one is given the freedom to believe the evidence provided by the Fathers and by Jesus Christ.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria,
Well said.
In addition I believe that God through His Church has given us freedom from the bondage of being wrong.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

I don't believe that the "Last Supper" story about transubstantiation is a real teaching of Jesus... it reads like a forgery added later by those with an agenda. This is not something that the man who taught spirituality by parable would include in his view of how to make a Kingdom of God on Earth.

His teachings were about people changing their minds and hearts... not about ANYTING ELSE. :)

Why does it matter so much whether the wine and bread actually become flesh and blood, or are symbols that represent them? But if it is so terribly important to know, it should be fairly easy to distinguish muscle tissue from wheat flour, and blood from wine in the laboratory. Why not just test them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ordinaryguy

Why does it matter so much whether the wine and bread actually become flesh and blood, or are symbols that represent them? But if it is so terribly important to know, it should be fairly easy to distinguish muscle tissue from wheat flour, and blood from wine in the laboratory. Why not just test them?

---

Didn't you know, Jesus was made from wheat flour and wine...

Let's try this again. Why do you insist on a literal undrstanding of Jesus' words at that last supper, but not on this occasion?

Matt 12:47-50
47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? And who are my brethren?
49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
(KJV)

I posted this on another thread, but it is just as valid as evidence here.

Galveston1,
I insist on understanding literally what Jesus said at His last Passover supper BECAUSE it was at a Passover supper that he said them.
Thus Jesus IS the Lamp of God who takes away the sins of the world and gives us life eternal.
Jesus is the living Lamb of the Christian Passover called the Eucharist (which means give thanks).
At the original Passover in the old Testament the flawless lamb was slain, it's blood painter over door posts to cause the angel of death to passover and the lamb's flesh was eaten.
With Jesus as the lamb of the Christian passover his blood is drink indeed and his flesh food indeed as He said.
I believe what Jesus said.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

Fred, you didn't answer my question. I believe everything you said about Jesus, I just don't believe in the Catholic dogma of trans-substantiation, because I don't believe scripture requires it.

Galveston1,
I DID answer your question.
I said, "I insist on understanding literally what Jesus said at His last Passover supper BECAUSE it was at a Passover supper that he said them."
Jesus said this IS my body... This IS my blood.
I believe what He said.
Thus he IS the sacrificial Lamb of God that takes away sins and gives life.
He IS the living Passover not a symbol like in the old Testament.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galveston1

Let's try this again. Why do you insist on a literal understanding of Jesus' words at that last supper, but not on this occasion?

Matt 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. 48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? 49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. (KJV)

I posted this on another thread, but it is just as valid as evidence here.

---

It was no more valid then when I wrote:

In Matthew 13:55 we see the clansmen of Christ, called brothers and sisters as was the custom, who were children of Mary of Cleophas, sister of the Ever Virgin Mary: refer to Matt 27:56, and John 19:25. With proper Hermeneutics we see in the Old Testament the word “brother” to express a broad kinship or clanship as well as the word indicating siblings. Following are selected thought from St. Jerome who argued vehemently that to hold that Christ had siblings was an error:

17. I say spiritual because all of us Christians are called brethren, as in the verse, Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity. … Shall we say they are brethren by race? … Again, if all men, as such, were His brethren, it would have been foolish to deliver a special message, Behold, your brethren seek you, for all men alike were entitled to the name … Just as Lot was called Abraham's brother, and Jacob Laban's, just as the daughters of Zelophehad received a lot among their brethren, just as Abraham himself had to wife Sarah his sister, for he says, Genesis 20:11 She is indeed my sister, on the father's side, not on the mother's, that is to say, she was the daughter of his brother, not of his sister. St. Jerome, Against Helvidius.

If we were to argue for the literal interpretation of "brother" so as to insist on Jesus having siblings in this instance, then wouldn't that redefine John 19:26-27? Jesus says to John, “Behold thy Mother.” Being redefined in our errant insistence on a literal interpretation would add John to James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Jude as siblings of Christ; which of course is nonsense.

************************************************** ****
And to the Eucharist we find the bible to be literal.

John 6:48 I am the bread of life…If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world…Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you…55 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. 56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. 57 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me: and I in him. 58 As the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. 59 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead. He that eateth this bread shall live for ever.

No play on word, direct simple language, understood then and understood now. “I am the bread,” eat and drink and you will have “life in you”. Eat and you will be raise. Eat my flesh, drink my blood and live. Little doubt as to what Christ meant.

Matt 26:Take ye and eat. This is my body 27 And taking the chalice, he gave thanks and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. 28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins. 29 And I say to you, I will not drink from henceforth of this fruit of the vine until that day when I shall drink it with you new in the kingdom of my Father.

In Mathew we see, “This IS my body”. What is not written here is "this is like my body"; "this is symbolic of my body". What is done here is the first transubstantiation; "the transition of one thing into another in some aspect of being"; from bread and wine to the essence of Christ. The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist


It's not that Catholics take one literal and the other figuratively. We take both sets of verses as they were intended by the authors. The Eucharist has been and will continue to be the central part of Catholic life.

JoeT

JoeT777 ,
Excellent. Well done and well said.
Also Catholics are not the only ones who believe in the Eucharist. There are several other denominations that do so.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeT777

It’s not that Catholics take one literal and the other figuratively. We take both sets of verses as they were intended by the authors.

---

By what means do you become privy to the intentions of the authors?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeT777

In Mathew we see, “This IS my body”. What is not written here is "this is like my body"; "this is symbolic of my body".

---

Well done, you've identified that it is a metaphor and not a simile. Just like the world is not actually a stage, although Shakespeare said, metaphorically, that it is. It's still just a literary technique, nothing more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ordinaryguy

Why does it matter so much whether the wine and bread actually become flesh and blood, or are symbols that represent them? But if it is so terribly important to know, it should be fairly easy to distinguish muscle tissue from wheat flour, and blood from wine in the laboratory. Why not just test them?

---

It's a matter of faith. In the beginning, God told Adam and Eve not to eat of the fruit or they will die. They didn't believe Him, ate of the fruit and died spiritually.

In the New Covenant, God told the Apostles that the bread is His Flesh. Those who believe Him will live eternally. Those who don't will die the death.

Genesis 2 17 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.

John 6 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Capuchin

Well done, you've identified that it is a metaphor and not a simile. Just like the world is not actually a stage, although Shakespeare said, metaphorically, that it is. It's still just a literary technique, nothing more.

---

We don't deny the symbolic nature of the Eucharist. It is however an efficacious symbol. Jesus made His Flesh appear in the guise of bread in order to signify that it is food for the soul.

However, the Bread is His Flesh. He said so.

John 6 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.

1325 "The Eucharist is the efficacious sign and sublime cause of that communion in the divine life and that unity of the People of God by which the Church is kept in being. It is the culmination both of God's action sanctifying the world in Christ and of the worship men offer to Christ and through him to the Father in the Holy Spirit."

1391 Holy Communion augments our union with Christ. The principal fruit of receiving the Eucharist in Holy Communion is an intimate union with Christ Jesus. Indeed, the Lord said: "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him." Life in Christ has its foundation in the Eucharistic banquet: "As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me."

On the feasts of the Lord, when the faithful receive the Body of the Son, they proclaim to one another the Good News that the first fruits of life have been given, as when the angel said to Mary Magdalene, "Christ is risen!" Now too are life and resurrection conferred on whoever receives Christ.
CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 1391

Sincerely,

De Maria

More metaphors! Fantastic! You guys are getting the hang of this!

De Maria,
Well said. Well done.
Jesus clearly said what He meant to say clearly.
Fred

Capuchin,
If you refuse to believe that Jesus said the consecrated bread and wine ARE his body and blood, that is your business.
I will believe what Jesus clearly said.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by De Maria

We don't deny the symbolic nature of the Eucharist. It is however an efficacious symbol. Jesus made His Flesh appear in the guise of bread in order to signify that it is food for the soul.

However, the Bread is His Flesh. He said so.

John 6 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.

De Maria

---

I disagree because the body and blood was given by Christ to saves us, to give us life from the death of sin. We are to eat His flesh as the bread of life, and not like bread alone that is nourishment. Our nourishment from God is the Spiritual Truth that gives life. We are to remember as we drink and eat, that Christ is the that Spiritual Truth, and Christ was worthy in the death of the cross.

Scripture provides evidence of eating Spiritual Truth as the Word of God

Eat The Little Book

Revel 10 : 9-10 And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take [it], and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey.And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.

Live By The Word Of God

Luke 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Worship Only The Lord

Luke 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.

Man lives by the Word Jesus

Deu 8:8 And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every [word] that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Capuchin

Well done, you've identified that it is a metaphor and not a simile. Just like the world is not actually a stage, although Shakespeare said, metaphorically, that it is. It's still just a literary technique, nothing more.

---

No doubt you've heard this question before: if a tree falls in the middle of the forest, and nobody is around to hear it, does it still make a noise? We know that the phenomenon that creates pressure waves in the atmosphere (noise) still occurs whether human receptors are present. To prove it we might put recording devices in the forest (removing the human presence) and wait for the tree to fall. Once it does we have physical proof of the tree falling and that it did, in fact, cause a noise. Even this requires a modicum of faith, not that the tree falling didn't make noise, but faith that the recording was done technically correct, or that the reporting agent interpreted the data correctly. Furhter, this agent telling us about his understanding, may let us hear the recording, or he can write a report. Either way, he needs tell us in a way that relates to our understanding. In doing so he may use metephoric or symbolic language.

Similarly, Gospels factually report what Christ had commanded and what Christ had said would happen. So that we can relate, this may be metaphoric or symbolic in the telling, but this telling doesn't somehow undo the fact of the occurrence. Catholics hold that whether you or I are present, whether you or I believe, the consummated Eucharist transitions from the bread and wine into the real presence of Christ.

JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sndbay

I disagree because the body and blood was given by Christ to saves us, to give us life from the death of sin. We are to eat His flesh as the bread of life, and not like bread alone that is nourishment. Our nourishment from God is the Spiritual Truth that gives life. We are to remember as we drink and eat, that Christ is the that Spiritual Truth, and Christ was worthy in the death of the cross.

Scripture provides evidence of eating Spiritual Truth as the Word of God

Eat The Little Book

Revel 10 : 9-10 And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take [it], and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey.And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.

Live By The Word Of God

Luke 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Worship Only The Lord

Luke 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.

Man lives by the Word Jesus

Deu 8:8 And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every [word] that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

---

If we are to eat the “spiritual word” then why did Christ say? I am the bread of life…If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever (John 6:55). Why then did he make his will known even stronger? "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life" (John 6:55)

If Christ wanted us to eat the spiritual word then why did the Apostle John refer to Christ as, “the word made flesh” (John 1:14)? Scripture not only provides evidence of eating Spiritual Truth as the Word of God, but literal truth too, as Christ said, “eat my flesh,” “drink my blood.”

Where in the above list of your veses, does it say “eat my flesh,” “drink my blood,” and you shall have “everlasting life”? The verses you quoted above only gave good advice for living in this world; but Christ's command to “eat” gives the solution to everlasting life. So, you'll settle for some good advice when you're offered eternity?

Are you not just picking through verses just to bolster your argument? How much more explicit can a verse be? This is figurative and the rest are binding? John 6:48 I am the bread of life…If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world…Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you…55 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. 56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. 57 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me: and I in him. 58 As the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. 59 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead. He that eateth this bread shall live for ever.



JosephT

JoeT777,
Well done.
You are correct, Jesus was NOT speaking anything other than clearly.
He meant what He said and those listening to him knew it.
We know that from the way they reacted.
Some walked away complaining that what Jesus said was a "hard saying".
Peace and kindness.
Notice that He let them go and stood by what He said.
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

Do you believe what Jesus said that the consecrated bread and wine do become the body and blood of Him?

---

I don't, because Jesus Himself said that He was not speaking of actual flesh.

John 6:61-64
61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, "Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him.
NKJV

Further, it would be sinful if Jesus were to have commanded cannibalism. Cannibalism is seen as a sign of wickedness, and a judgment against those who turn away from God, for example:

Isa 9:18-20
18 For wickedness burns as the fire;
It shall devour the briers and thorns,
And kindle in the thickets of the forest;
They shall mount up like rising smoke.
19 Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts
The land is burned up,
And the people shall be as fuel for the fire;
No man shall spare his brother.
20 And he shall snatch on the right hand
And be hungry;
He shall devour on the left hand
And not be satisfied;
Every man shall eat the flesh of his own arm.
NKJV

Jesus says in John 6 that those who believed that He commended eating of actual flesh were those who betrayed Him.

I know that there are many who believe it to be true, but I will stand by what scripture says.

Tj3
It is not cannibalism as you and the ancient pagans claimed.
It is bread that has been consecrates into Christ's body as He said.
That proves right there that you just can not or refuse to believe Jesus when He clearly said, "This IS my body" and "This Is my blood" about His consecrated bread and wine.
There is no sense discussing this any further with you.
You mind is made up as is mine.
Peace and kindness,
Fred