Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood...

[Elijah John]

The Gospel of John quotes Jesus as saying "unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you."

For debate,

-Did King David, Moses, Elijah or any of the other heroes or heroines of the "Old" Testament/Hebrew Bible eat the flesh or drink the blood of the Messiah?

-If so, how so? If not, did they have any "life" in them? The kind Jesus was speaking of in John? (presumably eternal life)

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 18 by marco]

It depends which Jesus we are referring to. The Johannine Jesus is presented as mediator, and conduit to God. The Synpoptic Jesus preached direct access to the Father.
This in contrast to the legalistic, Temple based system mediated by the Priestly class.

In John, we have Jesus presented as the necessessary alternative to the Priestly system, in effect, the ultimate priest. The Synoptic Jesus, on the other hand, preaches direct access, direct access which needs no mediator. What mediation, for example is taught in the LORD's prayer?

The Synoptic Jesus is far more in line with the Prophets, their teachings and their experiences.

It was not only Jesus who exemplified, and embodied the Torah.

Yes, King David was not perfect. But neither was Jesus. Both, however, were righteous.

And if one reads the Psalms, one will see direct access taught there as well. Are the Pslams for the masses? Or only for the elite?

[RightReason]

I do believe that salvation is a matter of the heart, not the head.

Hmmm . . . is it not both?

“Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.� (Mt. 7:24-27)


“And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.� (Apoc. 20: 12-13)

Jesus seems to have made that point over and over again as well. No one is saved by getting their theology "right". Jesus did not seem to care about that, but rather about how truly and consistently one loves. God and neighbor.

Jesus never said, "Follow your heart�

What does it mean to follow one’s heart? If by “heart� we mean our “conscience� and “good intentions,� as the connotation seems to mean so often today, we might be in trouble. Because then it begs the question just what is a well formed conscience?

Jesus left us His Church and said to His Church, “He who hears you, hears me� Why did He leave us a Church if it is unnecessary? Perhaps the Church was established to help us know/understand what He desired of us – what He asks of us. To even know right from wrong.

*********************


Do we follow our hearts or do we follow the teaching authority of the Church? Jesus said that “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander� (Matthew 15:19). Scripture also tells us that “the hearts of men are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead� (Ecclesiastes 9:3), and that “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?� (Jeremiah 17:9).

http://biblestudyforcatholics.com/follo ... low-heart/

*************


We are told in Scripture to keep His commandments. What are His commandments? They are written in Scripture and we still can’t even all agree on that.

Is Baptism necessary? We are told in Scripture to do it. Why?

Can a same sex union be following Christ’s teaching? Should someone with a same sex attraction follow their heart?

Jesus told His Disciples to “Do this (Holy Communion) in memory of Me� Does it matter if we don’t? Why did He say it?


“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.� (2 Tim. 3:16). Can it all be reduced to follow your heart?

This paradigm of the heart enables many to be saved who are not orthodox Trinitarian (small "o") Christians, who are not "theologically correct". This would, or course, include babies, who have no theology at all.

Isn’t thinking Jesus only cares about what is in the heart and is not concerned about Baptism or the Holy Eucharist or “getting it right� in itself a theological position? Which things did Jesus say do you think matters and which things did Jesus say that you don’t think matters?

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.� (2 Tim. 3:16). Can it all be reduced to follow your heart?

On the other hand, if salvation depends entirely on understading and professing each article of the Creed, and consuming the Eucharist with the "proper" understanding, then that would exclude babies, "Old" Testament prophets, devout Muslims and Jews, and people of other religions, and of no religion.

Who says it depends entirely? Christ’s Church never said this. I believe you are creating a straw man.

It might put a person at a disadvantage if he/she knew less about their faith or never got to receive Christ in the Eucharist. It might mean they receive less of the graces God is longing to give them, but totally excludes them from eternal salvation? I don’t think that is taught. Again, do you not think God knows what we are responsible for and what we are not? Just because Susie is only 2 months old and can’t yet read Sacred Scripture, does that mean it is unnecessary for 35 year old Pam do so? Why were we given Scripture then?

Even if they manifest the fruits of the Holy Sprit in their lives. (Patience, kindness, love, etc.) How does one explain the manifest evidence of the Holy Spirit even in those who get their theoogy "wrong"?

Scripture explains this.

38 “Teacher,� said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.�

39 “Do not stop him,� Jesus said. “For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40 for whoever is not against us is for us. 41 Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward.

Did this negate Christ’s Church or the need for it? There is a lot of good that can be seen outside the Church and we should unite with our fellow brothers and sisters when we see this, but that doesn’t mean those individuals are receiving the fullness of the faith that God intended in establishing His Church in the first place.

Don't you think it is possible that the heart of God transcends theolgical "correctness"?

I do not think God who is Truth can transcend Truth – that makes no sense. Truth is truth. For example, if God says Baptism is necessary and someone isn’t Baptized, I think God is more than capable of providing His own Baptism for that person. And if He chooses to do so, it does not mean well, then God must not think Baptism important. On the contrary, I think it would show it not only is important but necessary in order to be with Him.

[onewithhim]

The Gospel of John quotes Jesus as saying "unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you."

For debate,

-Did King David, Moses, Elijah or any of the other heroes or heroines of the "Old" Testament/Hebrew Bible eat the flesh or drink the blood of the Messiah?

-If so, how so? If not, did they have any "life" in them? The kind Jesus was speaking of in John? (presumably eternal life)

To answer your first question: No, David, Moses, Elijah & the other people of the OT did not do that, seeing as they didn't even know who the Messiah would be. Hence, their faith was counted to them for righteousness, as can be seen in what is written in Hebrews (Hebrews 11:7-13).

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 21 by RightReason]

This reminds me of an OT verse." There is a way that seems right to man..."

[FWI]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

Did King David, Moses, Elijah or any of the other heroes or heroines of the "Old" Testament/Hebrew Bible eat the flesh or drink the blood of the Messiah?

No, they did not.

If not, did they have any "life" in them?

As you suggest, this life is presumably: eternal life. So, no they did not. Example: King David, in Ps. 16 makes a plea to God about his future death, which requests that he would not be left in his grave. However, Peter claims that he was still in his grave at the time (Acts 2:29) was written. So, when we review the O.T., relating to salvation for Israel it was to be achieved through obedience to God. Yet, all failed. This is referred to as: the Old Covenant. The New Covenant is the present means, where eternal life is offered. Those who lived and died under the Old Covenant will need to be resurrected (physical) and accept the Christ for who he is. The ones you mentioned and many others will accept this almost immediately upon their resurrection, but others, it will take longer and some may just refuse to accept.

But, it should be understood that "just" taking from the fruit of the vine (blood) and eating the bread (body) does not grant eternal life. There is much more to it.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 21 by RightReason]

LOVE God, LOVE neighbor. That was the essence of Jesus teaching. Love has to do with the heart, a heart for God. Didn't King David have a "heart for God".

Please don't twist my words with a straw man, making it sound like I'm advocating some hippie "anything goes" philosphy I am not. Love is implemented by way of the Commandments.

I am simply contrasting the heart and the head. Theology resides in the head. No one is saved by being "theologically correct". Jesus emphasized love leading to action. Call it "works" if you must, but "works" with the right motivation, pleases God. Remember the parable of the sheep and the goats. And this from Jesus brother James. "You believe that God is one, you do well. The devils also believe, and tremble."

Was James point about the importance of believing the right things? Or about putting one's faith and belief into action.

Besides, if James was including right belief in the phrase doing "well", he was referring to the oneness of God, not the Trinity. Shema, the Oneness of God to James constituted "right belief".

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 21 by RightReason]

You're conflating "Truth" with theology. The two are not one in the same. Theologians, can be wrong too, and often were. Much of Paul's redemption theology depended upon a literal Adam and Eve, and Garden fall story. And the Fathers of the Church derived their theology mostly from Paul. Faulty foundations, if you ask me.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 24 by FWI]

Then why wasn't the "essential" role of the future Messiah in spiritual salvation made abundantly and repeatedly clear to the ancient Israelites?

Were they attempting to please God in vainl by trying to observe HIS Commandments?

There is only one Saviour in the Hebew Bible, and his name is YHVH. (Yah). Not the Messiah, not Jesus.

I, even I am YHVH, and beside me there is no saviour.

Isaiah 43.11

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 26 by Elijah John]

Please don't twist my words with a straw man, making it sound like I'm advocating some hippie "anything goes" philosphy I am not. Love is implemented by way of the Commandments.

I am simply contrasting the heart and the head. Theology resides in the head. No one is saved by being "theologically correct"

That is what I am doing as well. Don’t twist my words to imply it’s all about theology void of heart.

But I still disagree with your general, “no one is saved by being “theologically correct�� If the person is theologically speaking doing everything God wanted him to do (ie: baptism, sacrificing, loving, confession, Holy Eucharist, etc) that is in fact the means to his sanctification and ultimately his salvation.

Call it "works" if you must

I must only because Scripture does so.

Was James point about the importance of believing the right things? Or about putting one's faith and belief into action.

But if one believes the wrong thing how can that be putting his faith into action?

You're conflating "Truth" with theology. The two are not one in the same.

Ha, ha . . . that depends on the theology. Some theology obviously must be true. It is a theological teaching to say . . . “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul� Is that not true theological teaching?

Theologians, can be wrong too, and often were.

Absolutely

[Elijah John]

Was James point about the importance of believing the right things? Or about putting one's faith and belief into action.

But if one believes the wrong thing how can that be putting his faith into action?

No evidence that James' theology included the Trinity. Just the absolute Oneness of God. Shema-monotheism. "You believe that God is one, you do well..." Notice he did not say, "you believe that God is Triune, you do well...Why not? Did James believe wrongly when he in effect, re-affimed the Shema, the absolute Oneness of God?

And even though James probably did not believe that same way you do, what is your guess, was James "saved"?