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)

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 44 by FWI]

No, this is incorrect…The Christ is the "Son of God," not God or the Supreme Entity.

I’m afraid I say that is incorrect.

There are many bible verses that address the Christ, as the Son of God. However, there is not one that addresses him as God,

There are 50 passages that prove otherwise . . .



John 20:28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!�

John 10:30 I and the Father are one.

Colossians 1:19 For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell,

In context, it is the Son Who is being described (1:13); He is eternal (1:15, 17-18), the Creator (1:16), and the unifying principle of the universe (1:17; cf. Heb 1:3): all attributes true only of God. Paul makes the notion even more explicit in the next chapter:

Colossians 2:9 For in him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily,

2 Peter 1:1 . . . our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

St. Paul uses the same phrase in Titus 2:13 as well.

Hebrews 1:8 But of the Son he says, “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, the righteous scepter is the scepter of thy kingdom.�

This is a remarkable passage, in which God the Father calls His Son “God.� It is a reference to the Old Testament passage, Psalms 45:6-7.

In Hebrews 1:6, God the Father also says that all the angels should worship God the Son. Worship can only be rightly applied to God, as we know from Exodus 34:14 and Deuteronomy 8:19. Yet Jesus accepted worship of Himself on many occasions (e.g., Mt 14:33; 28:9) and stated that He should be honored equally with the Father (Jn 5:23). In Revelation 5:8, 12-13 and Colossians 2:6-7, we find that Jesus is worshiped in every way that the Bible specifically describes worship of God the Father, with all the same words used (see: Rev 4:9-11, 5:13; 7:11-12, and Rom 11:33).

Jesus is omnipotent (possesses all power):

Philippians 3:20-21 . . . the Lord Jesus Christ, [21] who will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power which enables him even to subject all things to himself.

He's omniscient (all-knowing):

Colossians 2:2-3 . . . Christ, [3] in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

He's omnipresent (present everywhere):

Ephesians 1:22-23 the church, [23] which is his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all. (cf. Col 3:11)

Another astonishing passage along these lines is one where Jesus speaks about historical events described as being done by God the Father in the Old Testament. He casually applies them to Himself (what might be called “the Divine 'I'�):

Matthew 23: 34, 37 Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, . . . [37] O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!

Many attributes that are said to belong only to “God� are applied to Jesus in Scripture. God the Father said, “besides me there is no savior� (Is 43:11; cf. 1 Tim 4:10). Yet Jesus is called the “savior� of mankind in passages like Luke 2:11 and many others.

God the Father stated, “To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear� (Is 45:23). The same exact description is also applied to Jesus (Phil 2:10-11).

The Bible teaches that “God� is judge (1 Sam 2:10; Ps 50:6; Ecc 12:14; many others). But so is Jesus (Jn 5:22, 27; 9:39; Acts 10:42; 2 Tim 4:1). Therefore He is God.

God the Father sits on His throne in heaven (1 Ki 22:19; Ps 11:4; 47:8). Jesus is on the same throne, too (Rev 7:17; 22:1, 3).

At every turn in the Bible, only one conclusion is possible, to make sense of all these statements, taken together as a whole: Jesus is God the Son. He is the eternal, all-powerful, all-loving, self-existent Creator God.

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/darmstro ... sus-is-god

[Jack]

[Replying to post 48 by tam]

No we don't believe we are adding anything that wasn't already set in place for us by Jesus. We believe Jesus's sacrifice was performed "once for all". The Eucharistic sacrifice we celebrate is the one same sacrifice that Jesus instituted on the night he was betrayed transcending time to the present. The reason why we believe this is in John chapter 6 Jesus tells us "unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you have no life in you". To fulfill this requirement Jesus has to give us a way to fulfill it. The feast we are celebrating is the Passover sacrifice where Jesus is the Lamb. In the Passover sacrifice the Lamb is sacrificed and the flesh of the Lamb must be eaten. Same in the new Passover.

[tam]

[Replying to post 50 by Jack]

I am not arguing against partaking of the bread and wine that mean the body and blood of Christ. He told us to do this. Of course I am not arguing against partaking of His sacrifice.


But you said that Him telling the apostles to do this (eating and drinking) in remembrance of Him was instituting "the priesthood".


How does that institute "the priesthood?"



Peace again to you!

[Jack]

[Replying to post 49 by RightReason]

So you believe that Jesus is not good?

How does Jesus's ascension into heaven prove that Jesus isn't God?

God calling Jesus his beloved son actually proves relationship to God the Father.

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 51 by tam]

But you said that Him telling the apostles to do this (eating and drinking) in remembrance of Him was instituting "the priesthood".


How does that institute "the priesthood?"

Those were Jesus’ words to the Apostles at the Last Supper, where He had established the priesthood and was basically telling His Apostles to carry out what He was asking of them . . .


For full explanation see https://www.catholicworldreport.com/201 ... riesthood/


But this is an excerpt . . .


Observe the pattern: The high priest undresses, bathes, dresses, and offers sacrifice. It’s the same pattern found in John 13: Jesus undresses (v. 4), washes the disciples’ feet (v. 5-11), dresses (v. 12), and will soon offer himself in sacrifice.


In short, in John 13 we have the disciples receiving a new status, the status of priests, as made clear by the substantial parallels to passages about priesthood in the Old Testament.


https://www.catholicworldreport.com/201 ... riesthood/

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 41 by bluethread]

The Passover feast is perfected by Jesus. The account of the last supper in the synoptic gospels is the 3rd cup the part that the sacrificial lamb is consumed, but all that's mentioned it bread and wine. Jesus offers the words of consecration changing the bread and wine into his body and blood. Now they consume the bread which is now his body . Don't you ever wonder why they call Jesus the Lamb of God? He is the sacrificial lamb.

He told his Apostles "do this in remembrance of me", instituting the priesthood.

The 4th cup of the Passover he drinks on the cross and proclaims the Passover sacrifice over "it is finished".

This being the TD&D thread, you are free to hold whatever doctrine you please. However, it is not the sacrificial lamb that is consumed with third cup, but the Afikomen. The lamb has already been consumed before that. I also see no reason why the adding of "do this in remembrance of me" constitutes the creation of a priesthood. It merely adds greater meaning to Seder. Regarding the fourth cup, given his prayer in the garden, I will need to look at that.

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

It seems that the author of John was writing later in the history of the church. We can say that because the Jesus in it is quite positive over Moses: if you believed Moses, you would believe me.

I take it that the author of John was not thinking his writing would survive millennia and be analyzed and over-analyzed in light of millennia of nothing eschatalogically happening.

I think that works should be read in "the spirit in which they are writ".

[polonius]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

It seems that the author of John was writing later in the history of the church. We can say that because the Jesus in it is quite positive over Moses: if you believed Moses, you would believe me.

I take it that the author of John was not thinking his writing would survive millennia and be analyzed and over-analyzed in light of millennia of nothing eschatalogically happening.

I think that works should be read in "the spirit in which they are writ".

RESPONSE: Even it is shown that they contain errors and contradictions????

[showme]

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 eat the bread of life, is to eat the Word of God. David certainly ate the bread of life, in as he loved the Word of God. Drinking the blood, or wine, would represent imbibing the Spirit of God, which resides in the blood, such as the life is in the blood. David had been anointed with the Spirit of God. Yeshua came to fulfill the "Word of God" (Matthew 5:17), and represented the "bread of life" (wheat), which is to be eaten. Unfortunately for the "many" (Matthew 7:13) they don't eat the wheat seed (good seed), which is the word of the kingdom (Matthew 13:19) but the tare seed, planted by the "evil one"/"enemy" (Matthew 13:39), and become the wicked (lawless) tares which at the "end of the age", will be gathered out (Matthew 13:30).

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 57 by showme]

To eat the bread of life, is to eat the Word of God. David certainly ate the bread of life, in as he loved the Word of God. Drinking the blood, or wine, would represent imbibing the Spirit of God

Impossible. That understanding renders the passage nonsensical. Why would His followers say, “This is a hard saying? Who can accept it? And why would Jesus respond to Peter, “Do you take offense at this too?� Sorry, makes no sense . . .