Drink jesus' (God's)blood? Eat his flesh?

[Avoice]

Human sacrifice
Drinking blood
Eating human flesh

You cant get any more pagan than this


Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

NOW HERE IS WHAT THE GOD OF ISRAEL SAID THROUGH THE PROPHET ISAIAH.

"They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand. And none considereth in his heart, neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say, I have burned part of it in the fire; yea, also I have baked bread upon the coals thereof; I have roasted flesh, and eaten it: and shall I make the residue thereof an abomination? shall I fall down to the stock of a tree? He feedeth on ashes: a deceived heart hath turned him aside, that he cannot deliver his soul, nor say, Is there not a lie in my right hand?"

THINK!
EAT Jesus/ GOD?
DRINK the blood of Jesus/ GOD?

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 198 by brianbbs67]

Proved my point, though not by intent. Another wildly contradictory claim of "true Christianity" that was apostasized from without a trace.

Even within the NT, the Judaizer faction was never referred to in challenging the Deity of Christ, or the effectual nature of the Eucharist or Baptism. Again and again, what Paul is responding to is the Judaizer"s claim that Jesus New Covenant is not enough, you had to bring along the demands of the OT as well.

Look at the Early Church Fathers (ECFs), from the 80s onward. Protestant scholars read them and notice how conservative and conserving their attitudes are, that consistent lack of anything like innovation. But after the fall of Jerusalem in 70, the Judaizer faction died as the reason, the focus of the OT Law, Temple Sacrifice was annihilated. In the late 1st to mid 2nd centuries, the heresy to be addressed is infiltrating Gnosticism, which in it's hatred of the created universe was the utter enemy of Sacramental Christianity. The ECFs conserving apologetics address NOTHING like Arianism (arose late 3rd c.), or LDS, or Protestant theology.

Let's think about why things changed so abruptly after Rome sacked Jerusalem. The original church, assembly, was scattered or killed. History and Acts show they taught Moses. James the Just was the first head of the church, followed by Simeon and Jude. All the brothers of Christ.

After a few more years the Bar Kochba revolt happened in 135. The Christians were still worshipping on the 7th day and in the synagogues. They did not accept Bar as the messiah and he wasn't as he lost. The Jews kicked the followers of the way out of the synagogues and worked with Roman authorities to persecute them. Greeks and Romans now controlled the Sect of the way and perverted it with western beliefs(like trinity ). The rulers of the "new" church became increasingly Roman in thought. And they wanted nothing to do with Jews. I believe it was Tertullian who backed up Rome in the Sabbath change to Sunday. "Let us work twice as hard on the Sabbath to rebuke the lazy Jews" That is a paraphrase but true to what was going on.

So, under the pain of death and excommunication, The last 1700 years have passed.

Arius' thought on Jesus didn't just pop up in the 3rd century. They were always there from the beginning. Athanasious and Augustine did end their disagreement with Arians as Arians either disappeared or were made to disappear .

[Saber Bob]

[Replying to post 201 by brianbbs67]

The ECFs agree, following Jesus' warnings in the Olivet Discourse, most clearly in Matt 23-24 in the "this generation" inclusio and chiasm, the Jerusalem Church survived intact, fleeing to Pela (by going to and through the mountains), and afterwards, would have been in gathered, as Jesus predicted. The false dicotomy of "Jewish Christianity" vs. Gentile Christianity" is just that, false. The Jewish Christians would have seemlessly been intergrated into Gentile believer communities because they needed everybody to recover from the real Great Tribulation.

The Great Tribulation of Olivet and Revelations is when BOTH the Jewish authorities and Roman Imperial might were aimed against the still tiny Church. After the Jewish Revolt started in 67, the Romans had the far more serious threat of actual rebellions (Boedica's Revolt was right before the Jewish one) to occupy their intentions. After the revolt, it would take to the insane Domition's reign for the Church to face another persecution, but in the 90s, the Church, almost certainly calling itself Catholic, was too numerous and too widespread to be wiped out, especially without a coherent Jewish political authority.