Holy Meal Vs. Holy Meal

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1511727' date='Apr 27 2008, 04:56 PM']and then hte protestants usually whimper away at the debate they themselves created...[/quote]

You weren't there when I had a little sitdown with my former Baptist pastor about becoming Catholic.

Fun little chat. I was entirely unprepared for it, but I actually respect him all the more because he's the last to whimper away on matters of theology and morals.

[dairygirl4u2c]

have you gotten back with him when more prepared?


if you were prepared, and he was where he was at then... i would guess he'd wimper away.
if both were optimally prepared.... well then it'd be a good debate, which i bet i know how it'd end too, in terms of what points who wins on and such.
that's just me though...

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1512459' date='Apr 28 2008, 11:48 AM']But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this said to them: Doth this scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? [b]It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing.[/b] The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

It is the spirit that saves us, not the flesh. The words he speaks are spiritual, and not flesh. . .[/quote]

There are two ways the word "flesh" is used in the NT: either the literal sense of flesh as meat, or flesh in the sense of a pagan understanding of things (as Paul often used it). In John 6, Jesus uses the word in both ways, but in the specific passage you quote, it's in the latter context. So to paraphrase, Jesus says, "It is the Holy Spirit that gives life: pagan ways profit nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life."

Notice in the second sentence, Jesus clarifies that it is his [i]words[/i] that are spirit and life, in contrast to a false teacher's words that would be mere flesh (pagan). And what were Jesus' words? "Eat my flesh... drink my blood."

And how do we know that Jesus' words are spirit and life? Because he ascended into heaven, where he was before.

In response, I have two challenges for you to consider:

1) If we go with the common Reformed interpretation that Jesus says flesh in the literal sense profits nothing, wouldn't that also imply that the Incarnation profits nothing? Why would God take on flesh, die in the flesh, resurrect to life and ascend into heaven in the flesh, if "flesh profits nothing"?

2) I know this is a difficult teaching, but it is also consistent with all the early Church writings on Eucharist. We can even use the unfortunate situation of Church division to attest to this truth: if the Eucharist is some Catholic Church or Roman/Western novelty, why do the Eastern Orthodox (whose schism began centuries before 1058) hold to this and all seven sacraments at least as faithfully as Catholics?

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1512540' date='Apr 28 2008, 12:49 PM']have you gotten back with him when more prepared?
if you were prepared, and he was where he was at then... i would guess he'd wimper away.
if both were optimally prepared.... well then it'd be a good debate, which i bet i know how it'd end too, in terms of what points who wins on and such.
that's just me though...[/quote]

The lesson I learned is that I have no business debating theology with an M.Div., unless I someday have an M.Div. of my own.

Calvinists are not necessarily ignorant of Scripture, Church history, and Catholic theology. They (or at least some of them) deserve more credit than most Catholics give them.

Edited April 28, 2008 by LouisvilleFan

[prose]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1512087' date='Apr 27 2008, 08:14 PM']Wow, that sounds pretty arrogant. . .

Are you a Christian.

What's Jesus going to say about you?

When I said someone was going to help me with the teachings you hold dear, you insulted me.

You do know where that is from, right?

Deb, if I were you, I would be repenting right now for that evil remark, because that is not Christ like. You are pretty evil in my eyes, because of statements like that.[/quote]


But she believes in Christ and sees Him as her savior. By your definition she is a saint. So she must be an evil saint??

end

[kafka]

[quote name='picchick' post='1512479' date='Apr 28 2008, 11:08 AM'] No please get nick picky...it is the only way I learn.

Could it not mean that Jesus flesh that we eat is not for our flesh but for our spirits? Our flesh profiteth nothing but our spirits quickeneth.

I don't understand what you mean when you say: As a side note, Jesus says he was ascending to where we was before, proving that Christ is indeed God, and therefore we have someone saying he was god in a round about way.[/quote]
Well I would argue that Christ in the Eucharist may also heal the body itself, but I dont know if this is revelant to the argument. Anywho here are some interesting thoughts about the Eucharist by a theologian I know:

“All the communions of a life-time are one communion. All the communions of all men now living are one communion. All the communions of all men, past and future, are one communion.” All the consecrations of the Eucharist, throughout Time and Place, are One Consecration. All the Masses, throughout Time and Place, are One Mass.

The One Mass is the Mass at the Last Supper, celebrated by Jesus Christ. Every Mass is the Mass of the Last Supper, not by imitation or repetition, but by the timeless grace and power of God. At the Last Supper, Jesus Christ celebrated the Mass once for all Time and consecrated the Eucharist once for all Time. Every other Mass and consecration of the Eucharist is that same Mass and consecration of the Eucharist at the Last Supper. Just as Jesus Christ suffered and died once for all Time and Place, so also did He celebrate the Mass and consecrate the Eucharist once for all Time and Place.

Whenever we attend Mass today, that Mass is truly the Mass of the Last Supper, celebrated by Jesus Christ. Any consecration of the Eucharist, by any priest or bishop who celebrates a Mass today, is truly that one same consecration of the Eucharist by Jesus Christ at the Last Supper. Time is no obstacle to God. Would you like to attend the Mass of the Last Supper and receive the Eucharist consecrated by Jesus Christ? When you attend the Sacred Mass on any day of your life, you are truly attending the Mass of the Last Supper, not symbolically, but just as if you were at the Last Supper itself on the night before Christ died for our salvation.

[CatherineM]

Is it the Mormons who call everyone saints too?

[picchick]

Yes I believe so....

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='picchick' post='1512479' date='Apr 28 2008, 10:08 AM'] No please get nick picky...it is the only way I learn.

Could it not mean that Jesus flesh that we eat is not for our flesh but for our spirits? Our flesh profiteth nothing but our spirits quickeneth.

I don't understand what you mean when you say: As a side note, Jesus says he was ascending to where we was before, proving that Christ is indeed God, and therefore we have someone saying he was god in a round about way.[/quote]

I just like that, because there are some who would say Jesus wasn't in heaven before his ministry on earth. Jesus sure did think he was in heaven before his ministry, so I like pointing that out to people who say Jesus isn't God, and isn't enternal.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='picchick' post='1512479' date='Apr 28 2008, 10:08 AM'] No please get nick picky...it is the only way I learn.

Could it not mean that Jesus flesh that we eat is not for our flesh but for our spirits? Our flesh profiteth nothing but our spirits quickeneth.

I don't understand what you mean when you say: As a side note, Jesus says he was ascending to where we was before, proving that Christ is indeed God, and therefore we have someone saying he was god in a round about way.[/quote]

The reason I asked that question really is because of the Apostles response to his statement. They were worried, how do we eat the flesh and blood of our lord, and the Lord said

But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this said to them: Doth this scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

He said, if this worries you, makes you wonder, he was saying, you will not be eating my flesh and blood, it my spirit that will quicken you, the words I have spoken - does it mean at this moment, or all moments he had spoken to the, are spirit and life.

That's all I am saying. The word of God is also called bread!

My understanding has always been, it is the word of God that purifies and changes you, it conforms you to what God intends humanity to be.

One the verb tenses, I shall have to read it more carefully, and things may show that I may be wrong about things.

Edited April 29, 2008 by JesusIsMySuperHero

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1512461' date='Apr 28 2008, 09:51 AM']how do you account for the fact they left JIMSH apparently/arguably wrongfully guided and Jesus let them under false pretenses? i have a few ideas but want to hear yours.

how do you respond to the verb tense changes?

how do you respond to the idea that the early church was so forceful in the literal understanding?
i checked once, and tehre's strong langauge in all the known area that time.... asia minor, europe/italy, northern africa... all in the earliest church.[/quote]

My thoughts, some were unworthy because they were thinking carnally. Remember the carnal man doesn't understand the spirit. So they might of thought, literally, they had to become cannibals when Jesus said - eat of my body. If you were thinking Carnally, that sounds pretty gross, and if I was thinking carnally, I would leave.

This also bothered the Apostles, because they thought they had to eat the flesh and drink the blood of my lord. But they didn't leave. Like Abraham, perhaps, they saw the sacrifice of their spiritual Issac, Jesus - son of man, and thought, God has to do something to work around the fact I have to eat of the flesh and blood of their Lord.

So Jesus comforted them with words saying - you're not going to eat of my literal flesh and my literal blood, my words are bread, and my spirit is drink. Remember, the spirit is described as water and drink and living waters, and many other things in scripture. Is it the life flowing blood of Jesus? Do we not know that is might not be a possibility?

Remember, Jesus also says let all those who come athirst, he will quench it. All those who hunger will be feed. Was it literal/flesh/carnal/material or of the spirit?

This could probably be debated over and over and over again. But I have chewed on some mighty truths before. I have been quenched when I was a thirst of my Lord.

btw, I worked for 9 hours today, and some of your comments about me not responding because I was wimpering somewhere is really shallow, and I don't appreciate it. FGS, I have to earn a living. I can't just post on Phatmass any time I want. I have to feed myself, cloth myself, pay my rent, and entertain myself, and I need money to do that.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1512568' date='Apr 28 2008, 11:07 AM']There are two ways the word "flesh" is used in the NT: either the literal sense of flesh as meat, or flesh in the sense of a pagan understanding of things (as Paul often used it). In John 6, Jesus uses the word in both ways, but in the specific passage you quote, it's in the latter context. So to paraphrase, Jesus says, "It is the Holy Spirit that gives life: pagan ways profit nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life."

Notice in the second sentence, Jesus clarifies that it is his [i]words[/i] that are spirit and life, in contrast to a false teacher's words that would be mere flesh (pagan). And what were Jesus' words? "Eat my flesh... drink my blood."

And how do we know that Jesus' words are spirit and life? Because he ascended into heaven, where he was before.

In response, I have two challenges for you to consider:

1) If we go with the common Reformed interpretation that Jesus says flesh in the literal sense profits nothing, wouldn't that also imply that the Incarnation profits nothing? Why would God take on flesh, die in the flesh, resurrect to life and ascend into heaven in the flesh, if "flesh profits nothing"?

2) I know this is a difficult teaching, but it is also consistent with all the early Church writings on Eucharist. We can even use the unfortunate situation of Church division to attest to this truth: if the Eucharist is some Catholic Church or Roman/Western novelty, why do the Eastern Orthodox (whose schism began centuries before 1058) hold to this and all seven sacraments at least as faithfully as Catholics?[/quote]

But was what Jesus talking about the Eucharist, or was it the fact his body would be used to pay the price of the forgiveness of sins, and that if you believe the words he spoke, than you have already partook of the Body. I don't know about you, but when I ask God for forgiveness, I see myself putting a nail in the Wrist of Jesus Christ, and through his feet.

I partake of the cruxificition, and I partake of the ressurection after God forgives me of my sins, for again, I have mortified the works of the flesh.

So, the eating of the Eucharist really might mean, it profits nothing, but Jesus death on the cross brings his spirit which quickens us to him.

The thing is, I don't understand all mysteries, and I could be absolutely wrong on a lot of things. No man can truly know all the mysteries of God ever. He is unphatomable, his wisdom knows no depths, and his knowledge reaches to the highest heavens!

Mine does not. I don't really feel one pull or the other in this debate, but I like seeing people's views, and sharing my views.

Edited April 29, 2008 by JesusIsMySuperHero

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]There are two ways the word "flesh" is used in the NT: either the literal sense of flesh as meat, or flesh in the sense of a pagan understanding of things (as Paul often used it). In John 6, Jesus uses the word in both ways, but in the specific passage you quote, it's in the latter context. So to paraphrase, Jesus says, "It is the Holy Spirit that gives life: pagan ways profit nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life."

Notice in the second sentence, Jesus clarifies that it is his words that are spirit and life, in contrast to a false teacher's words that would be mere flesh (pagan). And what were Jesus' words? "Eat my flesh... drink my blood."[/quote]

louisville... this is a very very strong argument.
so strong in fact... that i wonder why i have never heard it. i consider myself very much knowledgeabe on this subject, and i don't remember hearing that.

i do remember the different ideas on "eat" though.

are you sure you're not confusing them? i concede there's always another argument i have not yet heart. it's just very interesting i never have.
if that's true, it's gonna blow me away a good bit.
i mean... it's still possible he was saying by your argument "don't think literally.... think spiritually about what i'm sayuing... ie, not literal flesh, or is it? or maybe something more, something you have to ponder about etc" perhaps to the cross frlesh etc. it's possible.

Edited April 29, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

but JIMSH... don't you think there's be people in the early church who understood properly? why isn't that recorded if so?

are we resting on teh presumption that those documents might not exist now but did at one time?
and from such reputable members.. was all of the known church deceived?
are you saying God would let that deceived apparence occur to us in our modern day looking back?

Edited April 29, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[picchick]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1513402' date='Apr 28 2008, 10:02 PM']The reason I asked that question really is because of the Apostles response to his statement. They were worried, how do we eat the flesh and blood of our lord, and the Lord said

But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this said to them: Doth this scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

He said, if this worries you, makes you wonder, he was saying, you will not be eating my flesh and blood, it my spirit that will quicken you, the words I have spoken - does it mean at this moment, or all moments he had spoken to the, are spirit and life.

That's all I am saying. The word of God is also called bread!

My understanding has always been, it is the word of God that purifies and changes you, it conforms you to what God intends humanity to be.

One the verb tenses, I shall have to read it more carefully, and things may show that I may be wrong about things.[/quote]


He didn't say that. If he did he would have called His disciples back to explain it better to them because He KNEW that they were trying to figure out why they have to eat Jesus Body. Jesus was patient...this is shown in the other passages. He explains and explains. He did not call them back. And he reiterated again that you have to "gnaw" on my flesh for eternal life.

The word of God purifies and changes you but the Body of Jesus is your soul's food. Without, it starves and dies.