Unless you eat the flesh and drink the blood of the son of man, you have no life in you

[sovietchild]

Are those quotes legitimate?

 

[Spiderman]

Are those quotes legitimate?

It is from the Bible

 

[Kemosloby]

I notice that of all of the people who claim to be Solascriptura (Bible-alone), I've never known of one that actually was. One very common unbiblical belief that is embraced by many who claim the Bible is their sole authority is the belief that Jesus was only speaking symbolically when he said his followers must eat his flesh and drink his blood.

John 6
This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
52Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.
57Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.
58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”
59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

Many Disciples Desert Jesus
60 On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”
61 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this...
...65 He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”
66 From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.

So, this was the first time in Jesus ministry that he lost followers. It was over this teaching. He never called them back to explain that he was speaking symbolically.

In every last supper account he says "This is my body, this is my blood". Those are not the words of symbolism. In fact, for the next 1500 years, every Christian Church on the face of the earth believed it to be literal. It's hard to imagine Jesus would use words to lead Christians astray for 1500 years without ever offering an explanation that He was speaking symbolically.

Paul goes on to further explain Holy communion as being literally the body and blood of Christ.
The early Church leaders ("Church Fathers") clearly believed holy communion was literally the flesh and blood of Christ as well.

Paul never said a word about "holy communion" or did anything that resembled what the Catholics do. He simply thanked God and broke real levened bread then handed it out to people who were hungry.

 

[Spiderman]

Paul never said a word about "holy communion" or did anything that resembled what the Catholics do. He simply thanked God and broke real levened bread then handed it out to people who were hungry.

Wrong!
Words of Paul:

1 Corinthians 10:16-17
16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?

1 cor 11
23For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

25In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lordʼs death until he comes.

27So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 30 That is why many of you are weak and sick and some have even died.

Interesting, if it was only bread and wine, nothing more, why were people getting sick and dying for receiving it unworthily??

 

[pearl]

I don't understand. Are you agreeing with me, disagreeing, or extending my answer?

I assumed by your statement;

Maybe if they (not to be rude) go back in history and see how the Church has a lot to do with inspired scripture and the structure of christianity, many would probably either want to turn to Judaism or at most Orthodox Catholicism.

,
that you held the position that Orthodox Catholics did not believe in the 'real' presence. They hold the same belief, except for the dogma of transubstantiation.

 

[Kemosloby]

Wrong!
Words of Paul:

1 Corinthians 10:16-17
16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?

1 cor 11
23For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

25In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lordʼs death until he comes.

27So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 30 That is why many of you are weak and sick and some have even died.

Interesting, if it was only bread and wine, nothing more, why were people getting sick and dying for receiving it unworthily??

You're missing my point. Yes, bread and wine, just like Jesus said to do. But where anywhere do they appoint a priesthood only worthy to give it? They did not free people from the Jewish priesthood only to make them slaves to the Romans. They say prepare yourself to be worthy to receive the bread and blood.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

that you held the position that Orthodox Catholics did not believe in the 'real' presence. They hold the same belief, except for the dogma of transubstantiation.

I never said they did not. I said that if a protestant christian wants to get closer to the real teachings of the creator, maybe go into Judaism or orthodox Christianity at most. Roman Catholicism has a lot but I feel Orthodox is more, well, Orthodox than Roman.

I never said anything about the real presence not being in the Othorodox Church. Where did you get that?

 

[Spiderman]

You're missing my point. Yes, bread and wine, just like Jesus said to do. But where anywhere do they appoint a priesthood only worthy to give it? They did not free people from the Jewish priesthood only to make them slaves to the Romans. They say prepare yourself to be worthy to receive the bread and blood.

You said " Paul never said a word about "holy communion" He simply thanked God and broke real levened bread then handed it out to people who were hungry."

That is false. His belief about Holy communion was that it was the body and blood of Christ.

Also, writings from the early Christians state the same belief.

 

[Kemosloby]

You said " Paul never said a word about "holy communion" He simply thanked God and broke real levened bread then handed it out to people who were hungry."

That is false. His belief about Holy communion was that it was the body and blood of Christ.

Also, writings from the early Christians state the same belief.

The bread and wine was the body and blood of Christ. Find anywhere in the bible where it's called holy communion, or use an unleavened cracker.

 

[Spiderman]

The bread and wine was the body and blood of Christ. Find anywhere in the bible where it's called holy communion, or use an unleavened cracker.

Regardless of what they called it, they believed it was the body and blood of Christ. They believed that through it, they were receiving Christ into their body (communion)

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The bread and wine was the body and blood of Christ. Find anywhere in the bible where it's called holy communion, or use an unleavened cracker.

Deuteronomy 16:3 - Thou shalt eat no leavened bread with it; seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread therewith, [even] the bread of affliction; for thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt in haste: that thou mayest remember the day when thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt all the days of thy life.

John 6:50-71 - This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

Genesis 19:3 - And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.

Matthew 16:12 - Then understood they how that he bade [them] not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

Communion is the same as Church and Body and joining together in like-mind. The Lord's supper is a communion just as the super they had when the creator killed all first born males. It doesn't need to be printed in the bible to be in there.

That, and the bread and wine is consecrated not the actual body and blood of christ. No catholic I know sees jesus' actual hair, bones, and skin in bread (not cracker-that's a different denomination) and no catholic I know tastes blood when they drink wine. It's the lord's supper.

Nothing more.

(Do you understand it? You don't have to believe it)

 

[Kemosloby]

Regardless of what they called it, they believed it was the body and blood of Christ. They believed that through it, they were receiving Christ into their body (communion)

Yeah, so what about the crackers? They broke bread in scriptures, leavened bread. That's a major symbolism because unleavend bread symbolized those under the law, leavened bread the grace of God. So to take the "holy crackers" of the Catholics is symbolically rejecting Christ.

Galations 5:2 Freedom in Christ
1It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not be encumbered once more by a yoke of slavery. 2Take notice:I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I testify to every man who gets himself circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole Law.…

 

[David T]

It isn't a problem until people proudly use Scripture to condemn people of other faiths. A lot of Solascriptura people say Catholics are unbiblical, unchristian, Pagan, and Idolators, and so I'm happy to show them that so are they being unbiblical.

If the Bible were to be the sole rule of Sacred Theology, surely there would have been somewhere in the Scripture that stated it to be so.

I'm not a good Catholic. I'm a spiritist who prays the Rosary and goes to Catholic Mass, but don't agree with everything the Church teaches. I'm more with Allan Kardec and his book "The spirit's book".

My beliefs and practices come under attack a lot by those who claim to be Solascriptura, so I'm happy to put them in their place on all the ways they are not Biblical in their faith. I'm okay with the faith of other people until they start using it to attack another faith.

 

[Spiderman]

Yeah, so what about the crackers? They broke bread in scriptures, leavened bread. That's a major symbolism because unleavend bread symbolized those under the law, leavened bread the grace of God. So to take the "holy crackers" of the Catholics is symbolically rejecting Christ.

Galations 5:2 Freedom in Christ
1It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not be encumbered once more by a yoke of slavery. 2Take notice:I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I testify to every man who gets himself circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole Law.…

Where does it say it was leavened bread

 

[David T]

There is a very very serious problem with the whole reasoning of it just structurally. If i had known of it when I was in my theology classes I would have blasted martin Luther in no uncertain terms and blasted any professor that didn't understand it. Which would have meant probably quiting school. There are people who literally become mentally ill because of this kind of nonsensical self referential reasoning. Luther himself exhibited mental instability and hyper paranoia beyound all reason as he got older. Its crazy dumb.

 

[Kemosloby]

Where does it say it was leavened bread

Lets start with the loaves Jesus passed out, Barley loaves. A loaf is leavened.

 

[Kemosloby]

Where does it say it was leavened bread

Yeah ok, I could be wrong. Loaf is sometimes used for unleavened.
I still wouldn't take nothing from the Catholics, their leaven reminds me too much of the Pharisees and Herod, rather than the leaven of heaven.

Matt 13:33 He told them still another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into about sixty pounds of flour until it worked all through the dough."

Mark 8:15 "Be careful," Jesus warned them. "Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod."

 

[Sleeppy]

It behoveth the Son of Man to be delivered up to the hands of sinful men, and to be crucified, and the third day to rise again.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You're missing my point. Yes, bread and wine, just like Jesus said to do. But where anywhere do they appoint a priesthood only worthy to give it? They did not free people from the Jewish priesthood only to make them slaves to the Romans. They say prepare yourself to be worthy to receive the bread and blood.

Regular people can give communion. The only difference is that they can't consecrate the bread and wine and they can't hear confessions. (Couple other sacraments but usually not the big ones people fuss over)

 

[psychoslice]

Its just a metaphor, its means until we ourselves become One in Christ, we then have no true life, or we only have a life that is carnal. t