Unless You Eat My Flesh And Drink My Blood

[WeberHome]

.
Regardless of how Christ is interpreted; one thing's for sure: unless people somehow eat his flesh and drink his blood, they have no life in them; viz: they are quite dead on the hoof.

● John 6:53 . . Jesus said: "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you."

The kind of life about which he spoke is not organic life; rather, it's a supernatural kind of life.

● John 6:54 . . .Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life,

According to John 10:28, eternal life is an imperishable kind of life. In other words; people have to obtain it only once, and they never have to obtain it again because eternal life cannot die, nor does it spoil or decay. Were that not true, then God would've died of old age long ago.
_

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Regardless of how Christ is interpreted; one thing's for sure: unless people somehow eat his flesh and drink his blood, they have no life in them; viz: they are quite dead on the hoof.

● John 6:53 . . Jesus said: "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you."

The Lord Jesus was speaking figuratively and we know this because what He said about His "flesh" later in the same discourse:

"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (Jn.6:63).​

 

[WeberHome]

.

He said about His "flesh" later in the same discourse: "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing

Jesus Christ's flesh was crucified for the sins of the world; and his flesh was restored to life for the world's innocence. It is difficult for me to believe that Jesus Christ's flesh is of no value.
_

 

[Jerry Shugart]

.Jesus Christ's flesh was crucified for the sins of the world; and his flesh was restored to life for the world's innocence. It is difficult for me to believe that Jesus Christ's flesh is of no value._

So what meaning do you place on the Lord Jesus' words in "bold" in the following verse?:

"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (Jn.6:63).​

 

[WeberHome]

Re:

Re:

.
● John 6:63 . . It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing:

There are religious movements-- e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses -- that sincerely believe human existence is entirely physical. But according to Jas 2:26, the physical component is only half the story.

I'm convinced that the "flesh" spoken of in John 6:63 isn't Christ's flesh, it's ordinary human flesh. And the "spirit" spoken of isn't the Holy Spirit, rather, it's the spirit spoken of in Jas 2:26.

In other words: human flesh isn't self sustaining. It cannot survive on its own; not even by eating manna which, in Moses' day, was the most nutritious food to be found anywhere on Earth. Ergo: remove the spirit component from human existence, and the physical component will drop dead to the floor no matter what it had for breakfast because it's the spirit component of human existence that keeps the physical component alive.

The life that Jesus spoke of in John 6:53, John 6:54, and John 6:63 is pretty amazing stuff. Its primary purpose is to sustain one's spirit not with ordinary human life, rather, with eternal life.

When people correctly eat Jesus' flesh, and correctly drink his blood; they are in possession of eternal life right now-- no delay and no waiting period. Note the grammatical tense of Jesus' statement below; it's present tense rather than future.

● John 6:54 . . Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood "has" eternal life
_

 

[clefty]

.
● John 6:63 . . It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing:

There are religious movements-- e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses -- that sincerely believe human existence is entirely physical. But according to Jas 2:26, the physical element is only half the story.

I'm convinced that the "flesh" spoken of in John 6:63 isn't Christ's flesh, it's ordinary human flesh. And the "spirit" spoken of isn't the Holy Spirit, rather, it's the spirit spoken of in Jas 2:26.

In other words: human flesh isn't self sustaining. It cannot survive on its own; not even by eating manna which, in Moses' day, was the most nutritious food to be found anywhere on Earth. Ergo: remove the spirit element from human existence, and the physical element will drop dead to the floor no matter what it had for breakfast because it's the spirit element of human existence that keeps the physical element alive.

The life that Jesus spoke of in John 6:53, John 6:54, and John 6:63 is pretty amazing stuff. Its primary purpose is to sustain one's spirit not with ordinary human life, rather, with eternal life.

When people correctly eat Jesus' flesh, and correctly drink his blood; they are in possession of eternal life right now-- no delay and no waiting period. Note the grammatical tense of Jesus' statement below; it's present tense rather than future.

● John 6:54 . . Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood "has" eternal life
_

After some disciples left...after other disciples were still troubled...even after He explained it is the Spirit that brings life...flesh profits nothing...after all that Yahushua still asked “Do you also want to go away?“

Peter answered “to whom shall we go? You have the WORDS of eternal life”

note Peter did NOT say “you have the flesh we must eat the blood we must drink”

 

[Jerry Shugart]

.When people correctly eat Jesus' flesh, and correctly drink his blood; they are in possession of eternal life right now-- no delay and no waiting period. Note the grammatical tense of Jesus' statement below; it's present tense rather than future.

How do people do that correctly?

 

[clefty]

How do people do that correctly?

How do those suffering celiac disease do that correctly...

If the bread once consecrated IS the literal body in its substance...how come allergic responses occur to gluten? Does His flesh contain gluten?

 

[WeberHome]

Re:

Re:

.

How do people do that correctly?

I wish I had a pat answer for that question, but thus far, one has eluded me.

However I think it's pretty safe to rule out the Roman Catholic method because the kind of life obtained by eating Jesus' flesh and drinking his blood is eternal life. (John 6:54)

Well; eternal life is an imperishable kind of life that can neither die, spoil, decay, or wax old. So if Catholics were getting eternal life from Rome's communion service, they would have to partake of the elements just one time only seeing as how eternal life is impervious to death; viz: it can't be used up, nor does it wear off or wear out-- eternal life is perpetual; and if not, then why call it eternal?

Moses' people had to eat manna every day because one meal of it was not enough to sustain their bodies forever. But the bread that comes down from heaven need be eaten only once, and never again.

● John 6:50-51 . . This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever:

POP QUIZ: The "bread" that Jesus spoke of in that verse is his body, i.e. his flesh and blood (1Cor 10:17). But which version of his body was he talking about? His crucified body, or his glorified body?
_

 

[Ttalkkugjil]

How do those suffering celiac disease do that correctly...

If the bread once consecrated IS the literal body in its substance...how come allergic responses occur to gluten? Does His flesh contain gluten?

Because the bread doesn't magically become Christ's body and nothing but. Rather, both bread and Christ's body are present.

 

[clefty]

Because the bread doesn't magically become Christ's body and nothing but. Rather, both bread and Christ's body are present.

Yes it does...it just appears in its accidents...to be bread...

“Consequently when we speak of transubstantiation, we mean that the whole substance of bread and wine, its "breadness" and "wineness," is replaced by the living and glorified Jesus Christ. What remains of what had been bread and wine is only their external properties that can be perceived by the senses. As the Greek Fathers of the Church say, the ousia or being of bread and wine is changed into the being or reality of Jesus Christ. On the altar after the consecration there is no longer bread and wine but the same Jesus who was crucified, died and rose from the grave; and who will come in his glory on the last day to judge the living and the dead.”

https://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/eucha5.htm

So the allergin gluten must be in its appearance as bread...in its “looks like”...NOT in its substance...NOT its matter...AND not only His flesh but His entire body...not pieces but WHOLE

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes it does...it just appears in its accidents...to be bread...

“Consequently when we speak of transubstantiation, we mean that the whole substance of bread and wine, its "breadness" and "wineness," is replaced by the living and glorified Jesus Christ. What remains of what had been bread and wine is only their external properties that can be perceived by the senses. As the Greek Fathers of the Church say, the ousia or being of bread and wine is changed into the being or reality of Jesus Christ. On the altar after the consecration there is no longer bread and wine but the same Jesus who was crucified, died and rose from the grave; and who will come in his glory on the last day to judge the living and the dead.”

https://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/eucha5.htm

So the allergin gluten must be in its appearance as bread...in its “looks like”...NOT in its substance...NOT its matter...AND not only His flesh but His entire body...not pieces but WHOLE

If the wine was actually changed into the blood of the Lord Jesus then why did He refer to it as being"the fruit of the vine?:

"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. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom" (Mt.26:26-29).​

Even though the Lord referred to what was in the cup as His blood later He made it plain that it remained "fruit of the vine" and not His actual blood. When Paul preached he "reasoned out of the Scriptures" (Acts 17:2) but if we are to believe that the wine was actually turned into the Lord's blood then we must throw our reason to the wind.

 

[clefty]

If the wine was actually changed into the blood of the Lord Jesus then why did He refer to it as being"the fruit of the vine?:

"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. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom" (Mt.26:26-29).​

Even though the Lord referred to what was in the cup as His blood later He made it plain that it remained "fruit of the vine" and not His actual blood. When Paul preached he "reasoned out of the Scriptures" (Acts 17:2) but if we are to believe that the wine was actually turned into the Lord's blood then we must throw our reason to the wind.

Drunk on the wine of her wrath of her fornication more like...

Do hope you realize we are on the same side on this...

If the wine turned to blood why do monks get drunk drinking consecrated wine?

Is the alcohol in its appearance?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Drunk on the wine of her wrath of her fornication more like...

Do hope you realize we are on the same side on this...

If the wine turned to blood why do monks get drunk drinking consecrated wine?

Is the alcohol in its appearance?

Evidently you have no answer to why He referred to what was in the cup as being the fruit of the vine after He had spoken of as it being His blood. You need to learn to distinguish between what things should be taken literally from what things should be taken in a figurative sense.

 

[clefty]

Evidently you have no answer to why He referred to what was in the cup as being the fruit of the vine after He had spoken of as it being His blood. You need to learn to distinguish between what things should be taken literally from what things should be taken in a figurative sense.

Ummm...I am agreeing with you...it was NOT turned into blood...

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Ummm...I am agreeing with you...it was NOT turned into blood...

So you agree that what the Lord said in "bold" in the following passage is not to be understood in a literal sense?:

"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. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom" (Mt.26:26-29).​

 

[clefty]

So you agree that what the Lord said in "bold" in the following passage is not to be understood in a literal sense?:

"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. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom" (Mt.26:26-29).​

Yes NOT blood as He had not even died yet...

That toast was to christen the new covenant as He signed and sealed it with His actual blood and actual death...no changes from the OT so

Eating human flesh and drinking human blood WAS STILL UNCLEAN...

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes NOT blood as He had not even died yet...

That toast was to christen the new covenant as He signed and sealed it with His actual blood and actual death...no changes from the OT so

Eating human flesh and drinking human blood WAS STILL UNCLEAN...

So you deny the teaching of the church of Rome in regard to what they call Transubstantiation?

 

[Ttalkkugjil]

Yes it does...it just appears in its accidents...to be bread...

“Consequently when we speak of transubstantiation, we mean that the whole substance of bread and wine, its "breadness" and "wineness," is replaced by the living and glorified Jesus Christ. What remains of what had been bread and wine is only their external properties that can be perceived by the senses. As the Greek Fathers of the Church say, the ousia or being of bread and wine is changed into the being or reality of Jesus Christ. On the altar after the consecration there is no longer bread and wine but the same Jesus who was crucified, died and rose from the grave; and who will come in his glory on the last day to judge the living and the dead.”

https://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/eucha5.htm

So the allergin gluten must be in its appearance as bread...in its “looks like”...NOT in its substance...NOT its matter...AND not only His flesh but His entire body...not pieces but WHOLE

You've given rich insight as to transubstantiation here. The thing is, though, that transubstantiation is, imho, an incorrect view of the eucharist.

Sent from my SM-A750N using Tapatalk

 

[Bladerunner]

.
Regardless of how Christ is interpreted; one thing's for sure: unless people somehow eat his flesh and drink his blood, they have no life in them; viz: they are quite dead on the hoof.

● John 6:53 . . Jesus said: "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you."

The kind of life about which he spoke is not organic life; rather, it's a supernatural kind of life.

John 6:54 . . .Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life,

According to John 10:28, eternal life is an imperishable kind of life. In other words; people have to obtain it only once, and they never have to obtain it again because eternal life cannot die, nor does it spoil or decay. Were that not true, then God would've died of old age long ago.
_

Metaphors (all) Unless you are of my Body and my Blood you will not eternal life. Yes, I believe in Jesus Christ in the Body that He sacrificed and the Blood that He shed for our Sins.

Blade