Eucharist Not In The Bible

[Aloysius]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1082262' date='Oct 2 2006, 07:18 PM']
The Church of Rome? That wouldn't be until the Council of Trent since the Councils of Hippo and Carthage were not ecumenical Councils.

I guess you are saying that God would not be able to put the canon together without the authority of Rome. And not until 1563.
[/quote]
good diversion. I used "The Church of Rome" in reference to the way many protestants deal with the whole Church. Regardless, it was the councils of Carthage and Hippo which determined the canon... but it was the bishops of rome and later ecumenical councils which enforced it... Carthage and Hippo themselves were gatherings of a heirarchy the same as the Catholic heirarchy. Hippo and Carthage are the first determitative lists (that does not conflict with others of the same authority like some lists of the ecfs) and then the Church of Rome is the one who finally surpressed other books from the canon of the whole church.

If you live in a North African Church under the jurisdiction of Hippo or Carthage, then okay, it was not the Church of Rome which surpressed these books from your canon. Otherwise, it was.

[Mitchell_b55]

"I guess you are saying that God would not be able to put the canon together without the authority of Rome. And not until 1563."

People often think because the Roman Catholic Church HQ is in Rome, that Catholics believe God must refer to Rome. This is not true, Rome has no significance beyond it's significance as the See of Peter, it is just a place, that has been occupied a looong time. Please respond to my thread Sola Scriptura, it is in the Debate Listing.

[cosiegirl]

And even if the Catholic Church was involved in the canon process (which I don't believe it can take full credit for), that still doesn't mean that they have infallible authority over everyone.

God gaves us his Word and he was able to preserve it through the centuries. All authority comes from God, and God alone.

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1082271' date='Oct 2 2006, 05:25 PM']
good diversion. I used "The Church of Rome" in reference to the way many protestants deal with the whole Church. Regardless, it was the councils of Carthage and Hippo which determined the canon... but it was the bishops of rome and later ecumenical councils which enforced it... Carthage and Hippo themselves were gatherings of a heirarchy the same as the Catholic heirarchy. Hippo and Carthage are the first determitative lists (that does not conflict with others of the same authority like some lists of the ecfs) and then the Church of Rome is the one who finally surpressed other books from the canon of the whole church.

If you live in a North African Church under the jurisdiction of Hippo or Carthage, then okay, it was not the Church of Rome which surpressed these books from your canon. Otherwise, it was.
[/quote]

And I say it was God who supressed the books. If the men were correct in putting together the canon it was by the power of God alone. And not because those men were special or infallible, but because can use anyone to do his will.

[quote name='petrus_scholasticus' post='1082273' date='Oct 2 2006, 05:27 PM']
"I guess you are saying that God would not be able to put the canon together without the authority of Rome. And not until 1563."

People often think because the Roman Catholic Church HQ is in Rome, that Catholics believe God must refer to Rome. This is not true, Rome has no significance beyond it's significance as the See of Peter, it is just a place, that has been occupied a looong time. Please respond to my thread Sola Scriptura, it is in the Debate Listing.
[/quote]

It was your own brethern who brought up Rome, not me.

[Mitchell_b55]

Why God did I promise to be kind and charitable? I just am ignored and trodden on. Alas, if it must be so.

P.S. - "If the men were correct in putting together the canon it was by the power of God alone." Then we agree, what is the difficulty.

P.P.S. - "It was your own brethern who brought up Rome, not me." I did not, I responded to your comment, the above quote confirms we agree. Perhaps not on the Canon, but atleast in the manner that it was decided. It was decided by God. My brethren do not disagree with this assessment, they are simply trying to explain that it was through the Church that "God" preserved the Canon. You must understand a semantic issue, when a Catholic refers to the "Church" he is referring to the "Mystical Body of Christ," thus he is intends to mean that the it was "God." Even though you may be confused by the terminology, we are on the same ground.

Edited October 2, 2006 by petrus_scholasticus

[Anomaly]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1082269' date='Oct 2 2006, 05:23 PM']
Experience and history do not determine God's plan.

No, I do not believe the real presence is supported in the scripture and I believe that considering the eucharist to be required for salvation to be counter-scriptural.
[/quote]What makes your new idea via your interpretation that the real "absence" is so 'right' after all these many, many, many years of Christian theology? I believe the Catholic "scholars" here will also point out that the Eucharist is not required for slavation but is a means of Grace, which is what is needed for salvation.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1082253' date='Oct 2 2006, 06:03 PM']
My answer from Page 3:
[/quote]

As an aside and I hope this is helpful to all PMers.... some of us have it set up to show more posts per page than others... So, what is my page 3 wouldn't be the same as your page 3. If you would refere to post numbers (located in the upper right hand corner) that would be more helpful...

thanks.

[cosiegirl]

[quote name='thessalonian' post='1082266' date='Oct 2 2006, 05:22 PM']
What passage tells you that it was all explicitly captured? John says at the end of his letters:

[12] Deme'trius has testimony from every one, and from the truth itself; I testify to him too, and you know my testimony is true.
[13]
I had much to write to you, but I would rather not write with pen and ink;
[14] I hope to see you soon, and we will talk together face to face.
[15]
Peace be to you. The friends greet you. Greet the friends, every one of them.

So where did he write it?

Actually a fairly answerable question and this thread has clearly demonstrated it. You say things are clear in scripture. Only when you assume that the understandings that you have in your head are the correct understandings. But are they really. My wife tells me "go to Target and get milk". A pretty simple, clear statement. She and I both know what it means. Yet within that simple statement there is a whole assumed understanding of what that sentence means, i.e. is there gas in the car, I have a drivers license, the route to the store, how I pay for it, etc. etc. .

Many assumptions. Scripture is the same. Paul for instance says " believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved". Is it that simple? Well yes it is but that statement implies much else that Luke understands when he writes Paul's words. It is not just a head bob and a sinners prayer but a life walk, starting with baptism. (I know you will disagree but your implicit does not trump mine).

Basically what I am saying is that what is left out of the scriptures many times is a proper understanding of the scriptures. A verse in Corinthians speaks of baptizing the dead. Now some religion (the Mormons actually do this) might decide they need to baptize the dead because of this passage. Traditionally speaking it is a false practice. But the scriptures do not put a judgement on the practice explicitly. Now the person whole holds a bible and reads the passage that speaks of baptizing the dead, has the scriptures, but if he baptizes the dead because of it he does not have the word of God. The word of God is made up of the scriptures and the proper understanding of them. That is why Paul says "hold fast to the TRADITIONS you have recieved, whether by word of mouth or in writing from us". Scripture cannot teach sola scriptura with this sentence in the scriptures because if sola scriptura is the end result then this passage is a contradiction to the scriptures. i.e. Paul teaches written tradition (scriptures) + oral teachings but then you say the Bible says sola scriptura. The two are contradictory.

By the way, I saw your answer regarding metaphores above. Interestingly enough I think the Lord's Supper is symbolic, metaphoric, spiritual, and literal sacramental all at once. I don't see the fact that the bread and wine symbolize community and Christ means that the sacrament is not the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. That is what "my flesh is true food, my blood is true drink" means. It's pretty clear.

Hope that helps.
[/quote]


Sorry, I am getting people confused, so maybe you can answer this simple question.

If I was stranded on a deserted island with just a Bible, would I be able to figure out how to get to heaven or would I be doomed for hell automatically?

[Winchester]

The Church has never taught that the Bible is insufficient.

[phatcatholic]

this thread has gotten off topic. allow me to bring us back to where we belong.

in the OT there are many forshadowings of the eucharistic sacrifice. first, in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Malachi+1%3A11§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mal&NavGo=1&NavCurrentChapter=1"][b]Mal 1:11[/b][/url] we see that in every place a burnt offering [or a sacrifice] will be made. in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Exodus+12%3A14§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mal&NavGo=1&NavCurrentChapter=1"][b]Exo 12:14[/b][/url] we see that the feast of the paschal lamb is a perpetual ordinance. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Jer+33%3A17-18§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ex&NavGo=12&NavCurrentChapter=12"][b]Jer 33:17-18[/b][/url] says that the house of Israel shall never want of a priest "to do sacrifice continually." the Eucharistic Sacrifice fulfills all of these prophecies.

next, although it is common knowledge that Jesus is the "paschal lamb" (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Cor+5%3A7§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=jer&NavGo=33&NavCurrentChapter=33"][b]1 Cor 5:7[/b][/url]), what is often forgotten is that the lamb [i][b]must be eaten[/b][/i]. this is seen in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Exodus+12%3A8%2C11§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=5&NavCurrentChapter=5"][b]Exo 12:8,11[/b][/url] where the Israelites were told to eat the lamb so that the angel would pass over them. in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Exodus+29%3A33§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ex&NavGo=12&NavCurrentChapter=12"][b]Exo 29:33[/b][/url] "they shall eat those things wherewith the atonement was made, to consecrate and to sanctify them". in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Lev+7%3A15§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ex&NavGo=29&NavCurrentChapter=29"][b]Lev 7:15[/b][/url] the flesh of the sacrifice must be eaten. in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=2+Chron+30%3A15-17§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=le&NavGo=7&NavCurrentChapter=7"][b]2 Chron 30:15-17[/b][/url] (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=2+Chron+35%3A1%2C6%2C11%2C13§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=2ch&NavGo=30&NavCurrentChapter=30"][b]2 Chron 35:1,6,11,13[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Ezra+6%3A20-21§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=2ch&NavGo=35&NavCurrentChapter=35"][b]Ezr 6:20-21[/b][/url]) the lamb is eaten so as to achieve purification. also, in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Ezekiel+2%3A8-10§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ezr&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]Ezek 2:8-10[/b][/url] and [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Ezekiel+3%3A1-3§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=eze&NavGo=2&NavCurrentChapter=2"][b]3:1-3[/b][/url] Ezekiel is commanded by God to eat the scroll--the Word of God--which was in his mouth "as honey for sweetness." all of these verses forshadow Jesus Christ, the lamb and the Word of God, who must be eaten.

from here we move to the new testament.

the first thing to note about the "Eucharistic Discourse" (as it is often called) from John 6 is that it occurs on the eve of the Passover, when the lambs are slaughtered and eaten (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A4§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=eze&NavGo=3&NavCurrentChapter=3"][b]John 6:4[/b][/url]). this adds greater significance to his words and further points to him as the paschal lamb that must be eaten. after this, [i][b]he begins to gradually call the Jews to a greater act of faith[/b][/i]. first, Jesus multiplies the loaves and the fishes. this points to the Eucharist in many ways. Jesus will be their nourishment and they will never grow hungry. also noteworthy is the fact that the account of the miracle begins with almost the same words as those which the synoptics and st. paul use to describe the institution of the Eucharist (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mat+26%3A26§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]Mat 26:26[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mark+14%3A22§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mt&NavGo=26&NavCurrentChapter=26"][b]Mark 14:22[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Luke+22%3A19§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mr&NavGo=14&NavCurrentChapter=14"][b]Luke 22:19[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Corinthians+11%3A23-24§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=11&NavCurrentChapter=11"][b]1 Cor 11:23-24[/b][/url]). this indicates that the miracle is a symbol of the Eucharist, about which our Lord will speak shortly. upon this miracle, the people begin to believe, but their beleif is imperfect b/c they see him as an earthly savior and wish to make him king (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A14-15§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=11&NavCurrentChapter=11"][b]John 6:14-15[/b][/url]).

[i][b]from this act of faith, he calls for one still greater[/b][/i]. next, he compares himself to the manna which came from heaven. but, while the manna nourished for a time, if they will only believe in him, the true bread, they will be filled forever (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A32-35§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=Johh+6%3A32-35"][b]John 6:32-35[/b][/url]). this is no small claim, to compare oneself to that very bread that saved the Israelites. but this is what Jesus has done........and on top of that, asking that they believe in Him as their spiritual savior. yet again, the Jews show their lack of faith (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A36%2C41§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:36,41[/b][/url]). [i][b]but, Jesus is not done, for he demands the most sublime act of faith[/b][/i]. and what is this sublime act of faith, that will weed out the unbelievers and even cause some of his very disciples to depart from him? it is to eat his flesh and drink his blood.

he begins by saying that this bread from heaven which they will eat is his flesh (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A51§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:51[/b][/url]). the greek word used for "eat" here is [i]favgomai[/i] (or "phago"), which means "to eat or consume." in response, the Jews obviously take him literally; they "strove among themselves" ([url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A52§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:52[/b][/url]). if he was still speaking metaphorically, would this not have been the time to clarify himself? afterall, he wasn't getting the act of faith he was looking for and it seemed to be b/c of how they were understanding him. also, we know that in many similar instances, Jesus explains himself to the people, or at least to the 12 on the side (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mat+16%3A11-12§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]Mat 16:11-12[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mark+4%3A34§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mt&NavGo=16&NavCurrentChapter=16"][b]Mark 4:34[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+3%3A3-11§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mr&NavGo=4&NavCurrentChapter=4"][b]John 3:3-11[/b][/url]) whenever he intends a meaning other than the one they understood.

[i][b]but, he does not do that here. instead, he is even more persistent.[/b][/i] starting with vs. 54, we find Jesus telling the crowd 4 more times that they must eat his flesh and 2 more times that they must drink his blood:

[b]54 [/b]he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
[b]55 [/b]For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
[b]56 [/b]He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
[b]57 [/b]As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.
[b]58 [/b]This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever."

despite using repitition to drive the point home, he even uses a new, much harsher and more explicit word for "eat." in these instances, the greek word is [i]trwvgw[/i] (or "trogo") which means "to gnaw, crunch, or chew." while "phago" may have a spiritual application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. it occurs only two other times outside this discourse (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mat+24%3A38§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]Mat 24:38[/b][/url] and [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+13%3A18§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mt&NavGo=24&NavCurrentChapter=24"][b]John 13:18[/b][/url]) and in both cases means a literal eating. it is undeniable what Jesus is asking of them. they must eat his flesh and drink his blood.

vs. 55 from this passage is also quite significant. for one, we are to eat, not his "body" ([i]sw'ma[/i], or "soma"), which often has a metaphorical meaning in the bible, but his [i][b]flesh[/b][/i]. the greek word here is [i]savrx[/i] (or "sarx") and it is always used for literal flesh in the bible (proof [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=4561&version=kjv"][b]here[/b][/url]). also, his flesh is meat [i]indeed[/i], his blood drink [i]indeed[/i]. the greek word here is [i]ajlhqw'ß[/i] (or "alethos"). it means "truly, of a truth, in reality, most certainly" and Jesus uses it to dispel any doubts concerning the reality of His flesh and blood as being food and drink.

in response to this they walk away, including many of his very beloved disciples. but [i][b]even now, even when he has lost many of his followers, he does not back down[/b][/i]. he turns to the faithful remnant, who acknowledge that His is "a hard saying" ([url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?new=1&word=John+6%3A60§ion=0&version=rsv&language=en"][b]John 6:60[/b][/url]), and says to them, "Do you take offense at this?" ([url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A61§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:61[/b][/url]). "Do you also wish to go away?" ([url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A67§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:67[/b][/url]). he does not intend to retract his statement or to explain it away. instead, he explains [i]to them[/i] why they don't believe it:

[b]61 [/b]But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, "Do you take offense at this?
[b]62 [/b]Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?
[b]63 [/b]It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
[b]64 [/b]But there are some of you that do not believe." For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him

it is often asserted here that, by saying that his words are spirit and life that he is meaning to clarify that he was only speaking symbolically. i find no merit in this claim. for one, nowhere in the bible is the word "spirit" meant to mean "symbol" and nowhere else is something said to be symbolic b/c it is spiritual. instead, what we find here is a comparison between the spirit and the flesh that is often used throughout the bible to mean one thing: human wisdom vs. supernatural faith. both Jesus and Paul use this terminology quite often to point out that we must go beyond the natural to comprehend the supernatural (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+3%3A6§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 3:6[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mark+14%3A38§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=3&NavCurrentChapter=3"][b]Mark 14:38[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Cor+2%3A14§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mr&NavGo=14&NavCurrentChapter=14"][b]1 Cor 2:14[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Corinthians+3%3A3§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=2&NavCurrentChapter=2"][b]3:3[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Rom+8%3A5§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=3&NavCurrentChapter=3"][b]Rom 8:5[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Gal+5%3A17§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ro&NavGo=8&NavCurrentChapter=8"][b]Gal 5:17[/b][/url]).

in response to all of this, we find the words of Peter in one of my favorite passages from the Bible:

[b]68 [/b]Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life;
[b]69 [/b]and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God."

[i][b]here Jesus has finally received that most sublime act of faith that he requires from every one of us.[/b][/i]

hopefully, this will suffice as an introductory defense of the Real Presence of the Eucharist. sorry it was so long. believe it or not, much more could be said i await your point-by-point rebuttal.

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1082287' date='Oct 2 2006, 05:50 PM']
Sorry, I am getting people confused, so maybe you can answer this simple question.

If I was stranded on a deserted island with just a Bible, would I be able to figure out how to get to heaven or would I be doomed for hell automatically?
[/quote]


If you could correctly figure it out, the Eurcharist is there. Unless you blind your self, making it a "too hard of saying."

[cosiegirl]

[quote name='phatcatholic' post='1082313' date='Oct 2 2006, 06:16 PM']
this thread has gotten off topic. allow me to bring us back to where we belong.

in the OT there are many forshadowings of the eucharistic sacrifice. first, in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Malachi+1%3A11§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mal&NavGo=1&NavCurrentChapter=1"][b]Mal 1:11[/b][/url] we see that in every place a burnt offering [or a sacrifice] will be made. in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Exodus+12%3A14§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mal&NavGo=1&NavCurrentChapter=1"][b]Exo 12:14[/b][/url] we see that the feast of the paschal lamb is a perpetual ordinance. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Jer+33%3A17-18§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ex&NavGo=12&NavCurrentChapter=12"][b]Jer 33:17-18[/b][/url] says that the house of Israel shall never want of a priest "to do sacrifice continually." the Eucharistic Sacrifice fulfills all of these prophecies.

next, although it is common knowledge that Jesus is the "paschal lamb" (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Cor+5%3A7§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=jer&NavGo=33&NavCurrentChapter=33"][b]1 Cor 5:7[/b][/url]), what is often forgotten is that the lamb [i][b]must be eaten[/b][/i]. this is seen in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Exodus+12%3A8%2C11§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=5&NavCurrentChapter=5"][b]Exo 12:8,11[/b][/url] where the Israelites were told to eat the lamb so that the angel would pass over them. in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Exodus+29%3A33§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ex&NavGo=12&NavCurrentChapter=12"][b]Exo 29:33[/b][/url] "they shall eat those things wherewith the atonement was made, to consecrate and to sanctify them". in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Lev+7%3A15§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ex&NavGo=29&NavCurrentChapter=29"][b]Lev 7:15[/b][/url] the flesh of the sacrifice must be eaten. in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=2+Chron+30%3A15-17§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=le&NavGo=7&NavCurrentChapter=7"][b]2 Chron 30:15-17[/b][/url] (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=2+Chron+35%3A1%2C6%2C11%2C13§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=2ch&NavGo=30&NavCurrentChapter=30"][b]2 Chron 35:1,6,11,13[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Ezra+6%3A20-21§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=2ch&NavGo=35&NavCurrentChapter=35"][b]Ezr 6:20-21[/b][/url]) the lamb is eaten so as to achieve purification. also, in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Ezekiel+2%3A8-10§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ezr&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]Ezek 2:8-10[/b][/url] and [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Ezekiel+3%3A1-3§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=eze&NavGo=2&NavCurrentChapter=2"][b]3:1-3[/b][/url] Ezekiel is commanded by God to eat the scroll--the Word of God--which was in his mouth "as honey for sweetness." all of these verses forshadow Jesus Christ, the lamb and the Word of God, who must be eaten.

from here we move to the new testament.

the first thing to note about the "Eucharistic Discourse" (as it is often called) from John 6 is that it occurs on the eve of the Passover, when the lambs are slaughtered and eaten (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A4§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=eze&NavGo=3&NavCurrentChapter=3"][b]John 6:4[/b][/url]). this adds greater significance to his words and further points to him as the paschal lamb that must be eaten. after this, [i][b]he begins to gradually call the Jews to a greater act of faith[/b][/i]. first, Jesus multiplies the loaves and the fishes. this points to the Eucharist in many ways. Jesus will be their nourishment and they will never grow hungry. also noteworthy is the fact that the account of the miracle begins with almost the same words as those which the synoptics and st. paul use to describe the institution of the Eucharist (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mat+26%3A26§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]Mat 26:26[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mark+14%3A22§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mt&NavGo=26&NavCurrentChapter=26"][b]Mark 14:22[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Luke+22%3A19§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mr&NavGo=14&NavCurrentChapter=14"][b]Luke 22:19[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Corinthians+11%3A23-24§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=11&NavCurrentChapter=11"][b]1 Cor 11:23-24[/b][/url]). this indicates that the miracle is a symbol of the Eucharist, about which our Lord will speak shortly. upon this miracle, the people begin to believe, but their beleif is imperfect b/c they see him as an earthly savior and wish to make him king (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A14-15§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=11&NavCurrentChapter=11"][b]John 6:14-15[/b][/url]).

[i][b]from this act of faith, he calls for one still greater[/b][/i]. next, he compares himself to the manna which came from heaven. but, while the manna nourished for a time, if they will only believe in him, the true bread, they will be filled forever (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A32-35§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=Johh+6%3A32-35"][b]John 6:32-35[/b][/url]). this is no small claim, to compare oneself to that very bread that saved the Israelites. but this is what Jesus has done........and on top of that, asking that they believe in Him as their spiritual savior. yet again, the Jews show their lack of faith (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A36%2C41§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:36,41[/b][/url]). [i][b]but, Jesus is not done, for he demands the most sublime act of faith[/b][/i]. and what is this sublime act of faith, that will weed out the unbelievers and even cause some of his very disciples to depart from him? it is to eat his flesh and drink his blood.

he begins by saying that this bread from heaven which they will eat is his flesh (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A51§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:51[/b][/url]). the greek word used for "eat" here is [i]favgomai[/i] (or "phago"), which means "to eat or consume." in response, the Jews obviously take him literally; they "strove among themselves" ([url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A52§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:52[/b][/url]). if he was still speaking metaphorically, would this not have been the time to clarify himself? afterall, he wasn't getting the act of faith he was looking for and it seemed to be b/c of how they were understanding him. also, we know that in many similar instances, Jesus explains himself to the people, or at least to the 12 on the side (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mat+16%3A11-12§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]Mat 16:11-12[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mark+4%3A34§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mt&NavGo=16&NavCurrentChapter=16"][b]Mark 4:34[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+3%3A3-11§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mr&NavGo=4&NavCurrentChapter=4"][b]John 3:3-11[/b][/url]) whenever he intends a meaning other than the one they understood.

[i][b]but, he does not do that here. instead, he is even more persistent.[/b][/i] starting with vs. 54, we find Jesus telling the crowd 4 more times that they must eat his flesh and 2 more times that they must drink his blood:

[b]54 [/b]he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
[b]55 [/b]For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
[b]56 [/b]He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
[b]57 [/b]As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.
[b]58 [/b]This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever."

despite using repitition to drive the point home, he even uses a new, much harsher and more explicit word for "eat." in these instances, the greek word is [i]trwvgw[/i] (or "trogo") which means "to gnaw, crunch, or chew." while "phago" may have a spiritual application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. it occurs only two other times outside this discourse (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mat+24%3A38§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]Mat 24:38[/b][/url] and [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+13%3A18§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mt&NavGo=24&NavCurrentChapter=24"][b]John 13:18[/b][/url]) and in both cases means a literal eating. it is undeniable what Jesus is asking of them. they must eat his flesh and drink his blood.

vs. 55 from this passage is also quite significant. for one, we are to eat, not his "body" ([i]sw'ma[/i], or "soma"), which often has a metaphorical meaning in the bible, but his [i][b]flesh[/b][/i]. the greek word here is [i]savrx[/i] (or "sarx") and it is always used for literal flesh in the bible (proof [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=4561&version=kjv"][b]here[/b][/url]). also, his flesh is meat [i]indeed[/i], his blood drink [i]indeed[/i]. the greek word here is [i]ajlhqw'ß[/i] (or "alethos"). it means "truly, of a truth, in reality, most certainly" and Jesus uses it to dispel any doubts concerning the reality of His flesh and blood as being food and drink.

in response to this they walk away, including many of his very beloved disciples. but [i][b]even now, even when he has lost many of his followers, he does not back down[/b][/i]. he turns to the faithful remnant, who acknowledge that His is "a hard saying" ([url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?new=1&word=John+6%3A60§ion=0&version=rsv&language=en"][b]John 6:60[/b][/url]), and says to them, "Do you take offense at this?" ([url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A61§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:61[/b][/url]). "Do you also wish to go away?" ([url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+6%3A67§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 6:67[/b][/url]). he does not intend to retract his statement or to explain it away. instead, he explains [i]to them[/i] why they don't believe it:

[b]61 [/b]But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, "Do you take offense at this?
[b]62 [/b]Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?
[b]63 [/b]It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
[b]64 [/b]But there are some of you that do not believe." For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him

it is often asserted here that, by saying that his words are spirit and life that he is meaning to clarify that he was only speaking symbolically. i find no merit in this claim. for one, nowhere in the bible is the word "spirit" meant to mean "symbol" and nowhere else is something said to be symbolic b/c it is spiritual. instead, what we find here is a comparison between the spirit and the flesh that is often used throughout the bible to mean one thing: human wisdom vs. supernatural faith. both Jesus and Paul use this terminology quite often to point out that we must go beyond the natural to comprehend the supernatural (cf. [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=John+3%3A6§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=6&NavCurrentChapter=6"][b]John 3:6[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Mark+14%3A38§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=joh&NavGo=3&NavCurrentChapter=3"][b]Mark 14:38[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Cor+2%3A14§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=mr&NavGo=14&NavCurrentChapter=14"][b]1 Cor 2:14[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Corinthians+3%3A3§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=2&NavCurrentChapter=2"][b]3:3[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Rom+8%3A5§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=3&NavCurrentChapter=3"][b]Rom 8:5[/b][/url]; [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Gal+5%3A17§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ro&NavGo=8&NavCurrentChapter=8"][b]Gal 5:17[/b][/url]).

in response to all of this, we find the words of Peter in one of my favorite passages from the Bible:

[b]68 [/b]Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life;
[b]69 [/b]and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God."

[i][b]here Jesus has finally received that most sublime act of faith that he requires from every one of us.[/b][/i]

hopefully, this will suffice as an introductory defense of the Real Presence of the Eucharist. sorry it was so long. believe it or not, much more could be said i await your point-by-point rebuttal.

pax christi,
phatcatholic
[/quote]

"The Words that I have spoken are spirit and life". He gave you the interpretation.

As I started this thread saying, if you take the literal eating of flesh then you have to take verse 54 literally and simply say that everyone who takes communion has eternal life.

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1082344' date='Oct 2 2006, 06:46 PM']
If you could correctly figure it out, the Eurcharist is there. Unless you blind your self, making it a "too hard of saying."
[/quote]

That isn't answering the question I asked, but thanks.

[quote name='phatcatholic' post='1082313' date='Oct 2 2006, 06:16 PM']
this thread has gotten off topic. allow me to bring us back to where we belong.

this is seen in [url="http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Exodus+12%3A8%2C11§ion=0&version=rsv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1co&NavGo=5&NavCurrentChapter=5"][b]Exo 12:8,11[/b][/url] where the Israelites were told to eat the lamb so that the angel would pass over them.

[pax christi,
phatcatholic
[/quote]

Actually, the angel passed over because of the blood of the lamb on the door. It is not the eating of the lamb that saved them from the angel of death, but the blood.

Likewise, it is not the eating of Christ that saves us but his blood (his death on the cross, not the wine either).

[Socrates]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1082253' date='Oct 2 2006, 05:03 PM']
My answer from Page 3:

I can see how you may misinterpret John 6 and throw in the other passages to confirm your position, but it is still just a misinterpretation. A long history of misinterpretation does not change that.[/quote]
By what authority do you declare your interpretation correct, and the Catholic understanding a "misinterpretation"?

Again, if this was just symbolic, why did so many find this such a "hard teaching" that they left Christ?

And if the Catholic understanding is a misinterpretation with a long history, the history goes back to the early centuries of the Church, as the Early Church Fathers all had the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist.

[url="http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1990/9002frs.asp"]The Eucharist is No Mere Symbol (Quotes from the Early Church Fathers)[/url]

In fact, as I posted earlier, St. Paul shows that he held the Catholic view of the Eucharist as being truly the Body of Christ, rather than mere symbol, in his first Epistle to The Corinthians:[quote]Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice. [b]For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord[/b].[/quote] (1 Corinthians 11:27-29)

If the Catholic view is a misinterpretation of Christ's words, this misinterpretation goes all the way back to St. Paul!


[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1082357' date='Oct 2 2006, 07:12 PM']
Likewise, it is not the eating of Christ that saves us but his blood (his death on the cross, not the wine either).
[/quote]

[quote]Then Jesus said to them: [b]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.[/b] He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me: and I in him. 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.[/quote] (John 6:54-58)

Edited October 3, 2006 by Socrates

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1082357' date='Oct 2 2006, 07:12 PM']
"The Words that I have spoken are spirit and life". He gave you the interpretation.

As I started this thread saying, if you take the literal eating of flesh then you have to take verse 54 literally and simply say that everyone who takes communion has eternal life.

That isn't answering the question I asked, but thanks.
[/quote]


Actually, it is an answer to your off topic question, that was intented to bring you back on topic. You are kinda of lost on a desret island, which is your church you have set up, and all have all you is the bible. But you do not correctly understand it, because you are willfully blind, only seeing what you wish to see. So in your case no someone lost on a desert island can not read it correctly, without The Bride of Christ as there guide, Holy Mother Church.

You are forgetting one important thing with John 6, it was the intention of the writer guided by God to teach the Eucharist is "indeed" real. Someone who takes communion [u]will have[/u] eternal life, if they also...

Accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Acts 16:31

Endure to the end. Matthew 10:22, Matthew 24:13, Mark 13:13.

Accept the Cross (suffering). Matthew 10:38, Matthew 16:24-25, Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23, Luke 14:27.

Be baptized with water. Mark 16:16, John 3:3-5 Titus 3:5, I Peter 3:20-21.

Be a member in God's true church. Acts 2:47.

Confess their sins. James 5:16, I John 1:9

Keep the Commandments of God. Matthew 5:19-20, Matthew 7:21

Heed the words of St. Peter, the first Pope. Acts 11:13-14, Acts 15:7.

And eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus Christ. John 6:51-58, I Corinthians 10:16, I Corinthians 11:23-29

Edited October 3, 2006 by KnightofChrist

[Aloysius]

Jesus says two things are "spirit and life" in that statement

#1 that the Son of Man will ascend to where He was before
#2 that his Flesh is true food and His blood true drink

It is much more difficult to be consistent with your symbolism and say "therefore, the Son of Man ascended to where He was before only symbolically and not literally" than it is to be consistent and say "therefore, eating Christ's flesh and blood feeds and re-gives you eternal life every time you receive it" and "you should only eat the Eucharist if you are disposed towards eternal life already"... that is a much more consistent reading of all of Christ's words: your reading requires you to deny that Christ ascended into heaven for Christ says:

[quote]"Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. [/quote]

See, the problem is that you do not understand the semitic mind, and therefore are just as completely incapable of determining the correct meaning from these words on your own as an alien from outer space would be of understanding our culture. now, if that alien stepped back and bracketed off their prejudices and tried to learn the meaning of the structure from the perspective of the culture as an anthropologist, he might have a chance. likewise, if you would step away from your red lettered english bible where it is presupposed that every english word came down pre-packaged for your salvation, you would begin to understand what John (the author) intended to say with these passages and therefore what Jesus intended when He spoke these words. Alas, you begin on shifty sands and anything we offer has no foundation to build upon... step back for a moment and see if you can understand the words from the perspective of the authors: as one prominent scholar of the semitic mindset puts it: "in ancient Israel, remembrance equals participation"... this sheds light on what Jesus means when He says "in remembrance of me" because, to a jewish ear, that sentence would mean "in participation of me" and, by extension they would understand in participation of His sacrifice and His flesh and His blood.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='SolaScriptura' post='1082357' date='Oct 2 2006, 08:12 PM']As I started this thread saying, if you take the literal eating of flesh then you have to take verse 54 literally and simply say that everyone who takes communion has eternal life.
[/quote]

I've been watching this whole thing, many interesting points so far. One thing I noticed though is this, and it seems to be the thing that you always come back to. Yes, I think you are correct (I may be wrong, but that's what I think that we need to take this passage literally as well, if we are to use the whole passage as literal. However, I don't see any problem for a Catholic to take this statement literally. I think that you use this statement with a different understanding of salvation(ie. eternal life) than a Catholic understanding of eternal life. A Catholic understanding of eternal life would say that at this time we do indeed have eternal life, just as the passage states.

Why is this? Because in order to recieve this eternal life one must recieve Communion worthily. To do this one must believe that he is recieving Christ fully, Body Blood Soul & Divinity. One must also be in the state of grace, meaning no serious sin is on his soul at the time of reception. If a person fulfills this then when he recieves he indeed does have eternal life, and if he dies in this state there is no doubt that he would go to heaven. However it doesn't stop there. Catholics understand that there are things that can take away this eternal life. So while we do indeed recieve eternal life, we can choose to give this gift back due to any significant evil that we partake in.