How should the church service be structured

[BreadOfLife]

This debate is ridiculous. Jesus plainly qualified his words as spiritual. Any argument for the literal is the result of blindness. How can a blind person see if he/she is convinced they already see?

That's EXACTLY what the crowd in John 6:66 thought - just before they walked away from Christ and returned to their former way of life.

What was his reaction??
Was it, "WAIT!! Let me explain! I was only speaking metaphorically!!"

NO - He simply turned to the Twelve and asked: "Do you ALSO want to leave."
Unfortunately - YOUR answer is "Yes!!"

Good luck with that . . .

 

[quietthinker]

That's EXACTLY what the crowd in John 6:66 thought - just before they walked away from Christ and returned to their former way of life.

What was his reaction??
Was it, "WAIT!! Let me explain! I was only speaking metaphorically!!"

NO - He simply turned to the Twelve and asked: "Do you ALSO want to leave."
Unfortunately - YOUR answer is "Yes!!"

Good luck with that . . .

Your bumbling BOL surprises me more and more. Your refusal to understand context gob smacks me.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Your bumbling BOL surprises me more and more. Your refusal to understand context gob smacks me.

Then, why don't YOU explain the context??

Explain to me WHY the people walked away from Christ when He told them in NO uncertain terms that they must eat (trogo, not phago) his flesh (sarx) and drink His blood (hah'-ee-mah) to have life within them.

Explain to me WHY He told them that His flesh was "true food" (al-ay-thace' bro'-sis) and His blood was "true drink"(al-ay-thace' pos'-is), if He really didn't mean it.

Explain WHY he didn't explain to the Apostles that He was speaking "metaphorically" and simply asked them if they ALSO wanted to leave. Jesus ALWAYS explained His teachings to His inner circle.

I eagerly await your "contextual" explanation . . .

 

[Truther]

This debate is ridiculous. Jesus plainly qualified his words as spiritual. Any argument for the literal is the result of blindness. How can a blind person see if he/she is convinced they already see?

Right..not literal.

Jesus, nor His disciples, EVER ate His literal body, yet the RCC claims they did.

 

[Truther]

WRONG on BOTH counts, Einstein . . .

Jesus is GOD . . .
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and THE WORD WAS GOD.

John 1:3
All things were made through HIM, and WITHOUT HIM WAS NOT ANYTHING MADE THAT WAS MADE.


Jesus was conceived in His MOTHER'S WOMB - like the rest of us . . .
Luke 1:31-32
And behold, YOU WILL CONCEIVED IN YOUR WOMB AND BEAR A SON, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High.

Luke 1:35
And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God.

Stop rejecting the Word of God.
STUDY your Bible . . .

Great verses, which show how God got Mary pregnant.

Then God, the creator was creating THROUGH His born son in the beginning.

And all this time you thought Jesus was eternally begotten by God per some other woman in eternity.....

 

[Truther]

We don't surmise such blasphemies. You are as ignorant of Christianity as you are insulting. Your mockery of the Eucharist is diabolical. Back on ignore you go, I can't stomach the evil in your posts.

It's about time you see things my way.

 

[Truther]

It was no average dinner, but the Passover meal. 4 cups of wine are required (Paul speaks of The Cup of Blessing, the Third Cup.) Jesus conspicuously omits the Forth Cup. This is because the sacrificial offering, Bread and Wine, at the Passover (Last Supper) is one and the same as the sacrifice on the cross, the True Lamb of God, which we are commanded to eat. The Feeding of the Multitudes foreshadows His power to multiply His Body and Blood (in the form of Bread and Wine) that we may have eternal life. Jesus can do this because He is God. To deny this power diminishes Jesus to some kind of sentimental wimp.

...which was completely fabricated per extra biblical commentary.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Great verses, which show how God got Mary pregnant.
Then God, the creator was creating THROUGH His born son in the beginning.
And all this time you thought Jesus was eternally begotten by God per some other woman in eternity.....

Funny how ignorant minds work . . .

 

[Truther]

Funny how ignorant minds work . . .

How was Jesus eternally begotten by the Father?


be·get
/bəˈɡet/
erb
LITERARY
3rd person present: begets

1. 1.
   (typically of a man, sometimes of a man and a woman) bring (a child) into existence by the process of reproduction.

 

[BreadOfLife]

How was Jesus eternally begotten by the Father?

be·get
/bəˈɡet/
erb
LITERARY
3rd person present: begets

1. 1.
   (typically of a man, sometimes of a man and a woman) bring (a child) into existence by the process of reproduction.

Ummmmmm. the key word here is "ETERNALLY", Einstein.
He wasn't "made" - everything was made through HIM (John 1:1).

What color is the sky in your world?

 

[Illuminator]

Then, why don't YOU explain the context??

Explain to me WHY the people walked away from Christ when He told them in NO uncertain terms that they must eat (trogo, not phago) his flesh (sarx) and drink His blood (hah'-ee-mah) to have life within them.

They are satisfied with rationalistic explanations.
John 6:23-53 – a symbolic interpretation is not plausible. Throughout these verses, the Greek text uses the word “phago” nine times. “Phago” literally means “to eat” or “physically consume.” Like the objectors of our day, the disciples take issue with Jesus’ literal usage of “eat.” So Jesus does what?

John 6:54, 56, 57, 58 – He uses an even more literal verb, translated as “trogo,” which means to gnaw or chew or crunch. He increases the literalness and drives his message home. Jesus will literally give us His flesh and blood to eat. The word “trogo” is only used two other times in the New Testament (in Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18) and it always means to literally gnaw or chew meat. While “phago” might also have a spiritual application, “trogo” is never used metaphorically in Greek. So disbelievers cannot find one verse in Scripture where “trogo” is used symbolically, and yet this must be their argument if they are going to deny the Catholic understanding of Jesus’ words. Moreover, the Jews already knew Jesus was speaking literally even before Jesus used the word “trogo” when they said “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” (John 6:52).

John 6:55 – to clarify further, Jesus says “For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed.” This phrase can only be understood as being responsive to those who do not believe that Jesus’ flesh is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed. Further, Jesus uses the word which is translated as “sarx.” “Sarx” means flesh (not “soma” which means body). See, for example, John 1:13,14; 3:6; 8:15; 17:2; Matt. 16:17; 19:5; 24:22; 26:41; Mark 10:8; 13:20; 14:38; and Luke 3:6; 24:39 which provides other examples in Scripture where “sarx” means flesh. It is always literal.

Explain to me WHY He told them that His flesh was "true food" (al-ay-thace' bro'-sis) and His blood was "true drink"(al-ay-thace' pos'-is), if He really didn't mean it.

John 6:55 – further, the phrases “real” food and “real” drink use the word “alethes.” “Alethes” means “really” or “truly,” and would only be used if there were doubts concerning the reality of Jesus’ flesh and blood as being food and drink. Thus, Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His body and blood being actual food and drink.

Explain WHY he didn't explain to the Apostles that He was speaking "metaphorically" and simply asked them if they ALSO wanted to leave. Jesus ALWAYS explained His teachings to His inner circle.

John 6:60 – as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus’ disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, “Who can ‘listen’ to it (much less understand it)?” To the unillumined mind, it seems grotesque.

John 6:61-63 – Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus’ use of the phrase “the spirit gives life” means the disciples need supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words. Anti-Catholics don't have supernatural faith, just rationalism. Worse, they resist supernatural faith at every turn.

I eagerly await your "contextual" explanation . . .

Especially contextual explanations for "sarx" and "trogo". They don't have any.

 

[Marymog]

The Apostles would have never ate something like that at the last supper or any other supper for that matter.

They ate food there.

You have described the bread that Jesus offered the Apostles as his body at The Last Supper as chalk.

Would you be brave enough to ask them if it taste like chalk?

 

[Marymog]

Eat food in memory of him, not a tiny chalk drop.

Your ignorance of scripture and Christian history is astounding

 

[Truther]

Ummmmmm. the key word here is "ETERNALLY", Einstein.
He wasn't "made" - everything was made through HIM (John 1:1).

What color is the sky in your world?

4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.


Jesus was made and named after God made him.

 

[Truther]

Your ignorance of scripture and Christian history is astounding

My ignorance of commentary is refreshing.

 

[Truther]

You have described the bread that Jesus offered the Apostles as his body at The Last Supper as chalk.

Would you be brave enough to ask them if it taste like chalk?

Jesus printed up chalk wafers on RCC presses?

 

[BreadOfLife]

4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Jesus was made and named after God made him.

Once again, Einstein - the key word is "ETERNAL".
Eternally-begotten means always was.

The verse YOU provided (Heb. 1:4) uses what is known as "phenomenological language".
In other words, my linguistically-challenged friend - it simply means that the verse uses simple language that any dolt can understand. It uses simple, relatable terms like Exod. 15 talking about God having "nostrils" or Psalm 91:4 describing God as having wings and feathers.
He's NOT a bird and He's NOT a guy with a big nose. Get it now??

Sorry for the big word.
I hope you didn't hurt yourself trying to pronounce it . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Jesus printed up chalk wafers on RCC presses?

Educated Catholic:
Jesus said that we MUST eat His flesh and drink His blood in order that we may have LIFE within us (John 6:53-59).

Ignorant anti-Catholic:
Duhhhhh, doze wafers taste like chalk!!

Educated Catholic:
Sooooo, how does that negate what Christ commanded of us?

Ignorant anti-Catholic:
Duhhhh, you poop out Jesus!!

Educated Catholic:
Why did Jesus say, “This IS my body”, and “This IS my blood”, if He was only speaking “symbolically”?

Ignorant anti-Catholic:
Duhhhhh, Constantine was your first Pope and you worship Mary!!

Educated Catholic:
That’s what I thought, Einstein . . .

 

[Truther]

Educated Catholic:
Jesus said that we MUST eat His flesh and drink His blood in order that we may have LIFE within us (John 6:53-59).

Ignorant anti-Catholic:
Duhhhhh, doze wafers taste like chalk!!

Educated Catholic:
Sooooo, how does that negate what Christ commanded of us?

Ignorant anti-Catholic:
Duhhhh, you poop out Jesus!!

Educated Catholic:
Why did Jesus say, “This IS my body”, and “This IS my blood”, if He was only speaking “symbolically”?

Ignorant anti-Catholic:
Duhhhhh, Constantine was your first Pope and you worship Mary!!

Educated Catholic:
That’s what I thought, Einstein . . .

Catholics are not scripturally educated, but unscripturally educated(commentary).

They are the queen of extra Biblical commentary and the masters of manipulation(of the masses).

They have created their mass deception empire through visuals to the scripturally impaired.

Quite a racket.

 

[Truther]

Once again, Einstein - the key word is "ETERNAL".
Eternally-begotten means always was.

The verse YOU provided (Heb. 1:4) uses what is known as "phenomenological language".
In other words, my linguistically-challenged friend - it simply means that the verse uses simple language that any dolt can understand. It uses simple, relatable terms like Exod. 15 talking about God having "nostrils" or Psalm 91:4 describing God as having wings and feathers.
He's NOT a bird and He's NOT a guy with a big nose. Get it now??

Sorry for the big word.
I hope you didn't hurt yourself trying to pronounce it . . .

4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Jesus was made and named after God made him.

Jesus was not made or named per the RCC?

Interesting extra Biblical idea.