Transubstantiation

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Cassandra

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2021
2,510
2,871
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What is the Lord's supper then?
I thought it was to commemorate His death.
It is interesting that at the First Communion Jesus was alive.
It is also interesting that the Bible says He died once, not repeatedly.
That is what "It is finished" means.

1 Pet 3:18 "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit"
Romans 6:10 "For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God."
Hebrews 9:26 "Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."
Hebrews 9:28"so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him."
Hebrews 10:10 "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Heb 10:12"but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God,
Hebrews 10:14 "For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified."

Christ is no longer in mortal form--He cannot die. He is in a different form than when He was a man.
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
972
456
63
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I'm vacillating between these now


Well, I will give you my thoughts:

The effort to defend transubstantiation (the essence/substance of bread and wine are displaced by the essence/substance of Christ) over consubstantiation (the elements retain a dual essence/substance) as an explanation of the phenomenon is, at a basic level, off-point. Real presence is real presence, regardless of what else may be present.

Some transubstantiation denizens argue that if the bread and wine are literally the Body and Blood of Christ, then they can no longer be bread and wine at all (whatever their accidental qualities or appearance). The Body and Blood, they say, must fully occupy the field, leaving no room for any other substance or essence. But it must be possible for the elements to retain a dual essence or substance if we allow―as most Christians certainly do― that Jesus himself enjoyed a dual essence/substance while on earth. The sense in which Jesus Christ can simultaneously be both “true God and true man” is the same sense in which the Eucharist can simultaneously be both true body and true bread, or true blood and true wine. (Certainly Christ’s dual nature is not the easiest concept to grasp; but let someone explain it to me, and I will then have an answer for him on why consubstantiation is a viable position to hold. :) )

Let’s apply Ockham’s Razor here. If consubstantiation is a sufficient explanation of the physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist, why go further? The Eucharist is mystical enough without also putting it through extra levels of explanation, as must be done with the doctrine of transubstantiation. Putting the elements through a chemical lab will surely yield the result that they are bread and wine; so why resort to Aristotelian niceties distinguishing the essential and the accidental in order to explain that result? Irenaeus’ “two realities” is a simpler explanation. Why not, with Paul, allow that the consecrated Eucharist remains “the bread which we break” (1 Cor. 10:16) and adjure the believer to “so eat of that bread” (1 Cor. 11:28)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: friend of

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
972
456
63
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I thought it was to commemorate His death.
It is interesting that at the First Communion Jesus was alive.
It is also interesting that the Bible says He died once, not repeatedly.
That is what "It is finished" means.

One of the attacks on Roman Catholicism emanating from the Protestant Reformation was a challenge to the notion that Christ is “sacrificed anew” at the mass―every mass―through literal transformation of the elements of bread and wine into His body and blood. The Heidelberg Catechism (1563), authored by the German theologian Zacharias Ursinus (1534-1583), is somewhat typical:

"Q. 80. What difference is there between the Lord’s supper and the popish mass?

"A.
The Lord’s supper testifies to us, that we have a full pardon of all sin by the only sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which he himself has once accomplished on the cross; and, that we by the Holy Ghost are ingrafted into Christ, who, according to his human nature is now not on earth, but in heaven, at the right hand of God his Father, and will there be worshipped by us.

"But the mass teaches, that the living and dead have not the pardon of sins through the sufferings of Christ, unless Christ is also daily offered for them by the priests; and further, that Christ is bodily under the form of bread and wine, and therefore is to be worshipped in them; so that the mass, at bottom, is nothing else than a denial of the one sacrifice and sufferings of Jesus Christ, and an accursed idolatry"


Whether or not Ursinus’ characterization of the “popish mass” overstated the medieval Roman Catholic view, modern Catholic teaching on the matter is somewhat different. Most Catholic scholars would agree fully with the first paragraph above, yet dispute the second, i.e., they would deny that sins are pardoned only by repeating the sacrifice of Christ. By current interpretations, that sacrifice is being realized―rather than repeated―through the consecration and offering of the elements in a mystical union stretching across the bridge of time and space. I have yet to find a better exposition of this view than the following excerpt from an 1884 sermon given by an Episcopal priest, Daniel C. Roberts (1841-1907), on the twenty-fifth anniversary of the consecration of his church building, St. Paul’s, in Concord, New Hampshire:

"Christ hath offered and been offered once for all. But that one offering stands in the eternity of the being of God, free from the bond and measure of time, and He who made the offering stands in the royal Priesthood of Melchisedek, without beginning of days or end of life.

"We, in our feebleness, measure by days, by years, by anniversaries, generations, ages, centuries, cycles, but eternity with God is an everlasting now, and time is not. And so we plead, and the church ceases not to plead, the sacrifice of Christ. We do it day by day, year by year, and the narrow, scoffing unbeliever dares to say that we think to repeat the sacrifice many times. But it is not so. In the presence of that altar of the one sacrifice, in the presence of the cross of Calvary, we stand to-day; and we share to-day, by His own gift and benediction, the very Priesthood of Him who offers that sacrifice. We are made an holy Priesthood, offering unceasingly, as our constant and availing plea, but not renewing, that which is never old, never anything but new, the sacrifice of Christ"


If Ursinus were able to retort, undoubtedly he would say “Aha! Then there is no need also to hold to the Real Presence; for the priest is merely reenacting rather than re-sacrificing!” Quite a few Protestants would agree with him. I don’t. In my estimation, no mere “reenacting” would allow the participants to appropriate the benefits of communion with Christ’s ancient sacrifice in the same way that actual consumption of the body and blood of Christ would achieve. Mere reenactment doesn’t bridge the gap of time and space. For that, re-presenting (making “present”) is needed. For that, real presence is needed.

Of course, the phrase “real presence” is ambiguous; the “presence” can be deemed purely spiritual and not physical at all. To be clear: that is not what I mean when I use the phrase. When I say that Christ is really present in the Eucharist, I mean physically. I mean, as the early Church Fathers meant, that it is literally Christ’s Body and Blood.
 

friend of

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2018
1,738
1,365
113
33
B.C.
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
One of the attacks on Roman Catholicism emanating from the Protestant Reformation was a challenge to the notion that Christ is “sacrificed anew” at the mass―every mass―through literal transformation of the elements of bread and wine into His body and blood. The Heidelberg Catechism (1563), authored by the German theologian Zacharias Ursinus (1534-1583), is somewhat typical:

"Q. 80. What difference is there between the Lord’s supper and the popish mass?

"A.
The Lord’s supper testifies to us, that we have a full pardon of all sin by the only sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which he himself has once accomplished on the cross; and, that we by the Holy Ghost are ingrafted into Christ, who, according to his human nature is now not on earth, but in heaven, at the right hand of God his Father, and will there be worshipped by us.

"But the mass teaches, that the living and dead have not the pardon of sins through the sufferings of Christ, unless Christ is also daily offered for them by the priests; and further, that Christ is bodily under the form of bread and wine, and therefore is to be worshipped in them; so that the mass, at bottom, is nothing else than a denial of the one sacrifice and sufferings of Jesus Christ, and an accursed idolatry"


Whether or not Ursinus’ characterization of the “popish mass” overstated the medieval Roman Catholic view, modern Catholic teaching on the matter is somewhat different. Most Catholic scholars would agree fully with the first paragraph above, yet dispute the second, i.e., they would deny that sins are pardoned only by repeating the sacrifice of Christ. By current interpretations, that sacrifice is being realized―rather than repeated―through the consecration and offering of the elements in a mystical union stretching across the bridge of time and space. I have yet to find a better exposition of this view than the following excerpt from an 1884 sermon given by an Episcopal priest, Daniel C. Roberts (1841-1907), on the twenty-fifth anniversary of the consecration of his church building, St. Paul’s, in Concord, New Hampshire:

"Christ hath offered and been offered once for all. But that one offering stands in the eternity of the being of God, free from the bond and measure of time, and He who made the offering stands in the royal Priesthood of Melchisedek, without beginning of days or end of life.

"We, in our feebleness, measure by days, by years, by anniversaries, generations, ages, centuries, cycles, but eternity with God is an everlasting now, and time is not. And so we plead, and the church ceases not to plead, the sacrifice of Christ. We do it day by day, year by year, and the narrow, scoffing unbeliever dares to say that we think to repeat the sacrifice many times. But it is not so. In the presence of that altar of the one sacrifice, in the presence of the cross of Calvary, we stand to-day; and we share to-day, by His own gift and benediction, the very Priesthood of Him who offers that sacrifice. We are made an holy Priesthood, offering unceasingly, as our constant and availing plea, but not renewing, that which is never old, never anything but new, the sacrifice of Christ"


If Ursinus were able to retort, undoubtedly he would say “Aha! Then there is no need also to hold to the Real Presence; for the priest is merely reenacting rather than re-sacrificing!” Quite a few Protestants would agree with him. I don’t. In my estimation, no mere “reenacting” would allow the participants to appropriate the benefits of communion with Christ’s ancient sacrifice in the same way that actual consumption of the body and blood of Christ would achieve. Mere reenactment doesn’t bridge the gap of time and space. For that, re-presenting (making “present”) is needed. For that, real presence is needed.

Of course, the phrase “real presence” is ambiguous; the “presence” can be deemed purely spiritual and not physical at all. To be clear: that is not what I mean when I use the phrase. When I say that Christ is really present in the Eucharist, I mean physically. I mean, as the early Church Fathers meant, that it is literally Christ’s Body and Blood.

Then I think I'm leaning to consubstantiation. But I agree, just because someone believes in transubstantiation doesn't mean they are sacrificing Christ "over again"
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
972
456
63
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Whether to believe in transubstantiation, consubstantiation, or that there is no real presence of Christ at all in the Eucharist and the meal is commemorative only, is up to each of us. But to those who deny the Real Presence, I can only echo the fourth century father St. Cyril of Jerusalem: “Do not then think of the elements as bare bread and wine. They are, according to the Lord’s declaration, body and blood. Though the perception suggests the contrary, let faith be your stay. Instead of judging matters by taste, let faith give you an unwavering confidence that you have been privileged to receive the body and blood of Christ.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: LearningToLetGo

friend of

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2018
1,738
1,365
113
33
B.C.
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Whether to believe in transubstantiation, consubstantiation, or that there is no real presence of Christ at all in the Eucharist and the meal is commemorative only, is up to each of us. But to those who deny the Real Presence, I can only echo the fourth century father St. Cyril of Jerusalem: “Do not then think of the elements as bare bread and wine. They are, according to the Lord’s declaration, body and blood. Though the perception suggests the contrary, let faith be your stay. Instead of judging matters by taste, let faith give you an unwavering confidence that you have been privileged to receive the body and blood of Christ.”

Amen. Thank you for your insights and welcome to the forum, RedFan
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
But I agree, just because someone believes in transubstantiation doesn't mean they are sacrificing Christ "over again"...
Of course it means just that. Since the sacrifice of the Mass is deemed by Catholics to be a literal sacrifice, it means that Christ is re-sacrificed each time the Mass takes place. Here is what is stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner."188
 

friend of

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2018
1,738
1,365
113
33
B.C.
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Of course it means just that. Since the sacrifice of the Mass is deemed by Catholics to be a literal sacrifice, it means that Christ is re-sacrificed each time the Mass takes place. Here is what is stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner."188

K well I believe in consubstatiation then.
 

friend of

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2018
1,738
1,365
113
33
B.C.
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
John 6:53-58

These verses are what I'm basing my decision on. If communion is only symbolic, then one is not truly ingesting Christ's body and blood.
 

GRACE ambassador

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2021
2,370
1,532
113
71
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
op: transubstantiation? = religious cannabalism?

) eating a body and drinking blood is not cannabalism?
) cannabalism is now a "righteous work"??
) as long as one is "ingesting/drinking" God???
) men have power "to call God out of heaven" and literally
"into a piece of bread, and a cup of WINE (alcoholic)"????
) Is this Really from God?????:
) Is this a "New" gospel from Him??????:

) So, not saved "By GRACE Through faith," but by cannabalism???

) Is this not why some in romanism attend daily, for "FEAR
that they would be lost, if not ingesting body And blood"??

) "By GRACE Through faith," The Blessed Holy Spirit does NOT
"dwell in the believer for ETERNITY"?

) The Blessed Holy Spirit Does NOT "BAPTIZE" the new
believer "Into The Body Of Christ, Seated In Heaven"?

) What happened to Commemoration, celebration,
memorial, and "rememberance Of ME"??

) with metaphor/symbolism?:

1Co 11:26 "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink
this cup, ye do shew The LORD's Death till he come."​

Bible Answer To Confusing church Bewilderment!

GRACE And Peace...
 

MatthewG

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2021
14,080
4,919
113
33
Fyffe
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
op: transubstantiation? = religious cannabalism?

) eating a body and drinking blood is not cannabalism?
) cannabalism is now a "righteous work"??
) as long as one is "ingesting/drinking" God???
) men have power "to call God out of heaven" and literally
"into a piece of bread, and a cup of WINE (alcoholic)"????
) Is this Really from God?????:
) Is this a "New" gospel from Him??????:

) So, not saved "By GRACE Through faith," but by cannabalism???

) Is this not why some in romanism attend daily, for "FEAR
that they would be lost, if not ingesting body And blood"??

) "By GRACE Through faith," The Blessed Holy Spirit does NOT
"dwell in the believer for ETERNITY"?

) The Blessed Holy Spirit Does NOT "BAPTIZE" the new
believer "Into The Body Of Christ, Seated In Heaven"?

) What happened to Commemoration, celebration,
memorial, and "rememberance Of ME"??

) with metaphor/symbolism?:

1Co 11:26 "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink
this cup, ye do shew The LORD's Death till he come."​

Bible Answer To Confusing church Bewilderment!

GRACE And Peace...

Oh okay. From what I understood Jesus told them what he did, but he was using wine, and crackers (or bread), as an anaology to not forget about his death that he had suffered, as well as the resurrection in which he told his apostles many times over before this scene played out.

Could be wrong though.

Sharing this with everyone today: Eternal Punishment Papers - Excerpt
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
972
456
63
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
) with metaphor/symbolism?:

1Co 11:26 "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink
this cup, ye do shew The LORD's Death till he come."​

Fairly read, there is nothing metaphorical or symbolic in John Chapter 6:

48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”

Claiming that this is all metaphor and symbolism is akin to asking exactly what the Jews argued in v. 52.
 
  • Like
Reactions: friend of

GRACE ambassador

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2021
2,370
1,532
113
71
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Fairly read, there is nothing metaphorical or symbolic in John Chapter 6:

48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”

Claiming that this is all metaphor and symbolism is akin to asking exactly what the Jews argued in v. 52.
It is always, to prove a point, Very Convenient to just "leave things out,"
eh? NOTHING Spiritual, symbolic, nor metaphorical in John_6?:

"Then said they unto Him, LORD, evermore give us this bread.
And Jesus Said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that
COMETH to Me shall never hunger; and he that BELIEVETH
On Me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, That ye also
have seen Me, and BELIEVE not. All that The Father giveth
Me shall COME to Me; and him that to COMETH to Me I will
in no wise cast out." (John_6:34-37)​

Of course, the UNbelieving Jews would argue about "What He Said,"
because THEY WERE NOT about to "COME To Him, BELIEVE In Him,"
And Then "Get The Understanding," Correct?:

So, yes, "eating and drinking" Spiritual bread, IS figurative,
symbolic, and metaphorical for "COMING To And BELIEVING
In Him!:

Confirmed By:

"Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant,
how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed
through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the
cloud and in the sea;

And did all eat the same Spiritual meat; And did all drink
the same Spiritual drink: for they drank of that Spiritual
Rock That followed them: and That Rock Was CHRIST."
(1Co 10:1-4)​

GRACE And Peace...
 
Last edited:

Philip James

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
4,275
3,091
113
Brandon
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
But it must be possible for the elements to retain a dual essence or substance if we allow―as most Christians certainly do― that Jesus himself enjoyed a dual essence/substance

Hi Redfan,

This is actilualluly why I reject constabtiation.

For it proposes a 3 fold nature to Christ: Divine, human and bread

But I dont think its actually worth fighting over.. A view of consubstantiation is better than that of most Catholics according to a recent poll..


Pax et Bonum
 

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,082
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States

The Gospel of John Chapter 6
After these things Jesus went away to the other side of the Sea of Galilee (or Tiberias). 2 A large crowd followed Him, because they saw the signs which He was performing on those who were sick. 3 Then Jesus went up on the mountain, and there He sat down with His disciples. 4 Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was near. 5 Therefore Jesus, lifting up His eyes and seeing that a large crowd was coming to Him, *said to Philip, “Where are we to buy bread, so that these may eat?” 6 This He was saying to test him, for He Himself knew what He was intending to do. 7 Philip answered Him, “Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not sufficient for them, for everyone to receive a little.” 8 One of His disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, *said to Him, 9 “There is a lad here who has five barley loaves and two fish, but what are these for so many people?” 10 Jesus said, “Have the people sit down.” Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand. 11 Jesus then took the loaves, and having given thanks, He distributed to those who were seated; likewise also of the fish as much as they wanted. 12 When they were filled, He *said to His disciples, “Gather up the leftover fragments so that nothing will be lost.” 13 So they gathered them up, and filled twelve baskets with fragments from the five barley loaves which were left over by those who had eaten. 14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.”

Jesus Walks on the Water
15 So Jesus, perceiving that they were intending to come and take Him by force to make Him king, withdrew again to the mountain by Himself alone.

16 Now when evening came, His disciples went down to the sea, 17 and after getting into a boat, they started to cross the sea to Capernaum. It had already become dark, and Jesus had not yet come to them. 18 The sea began to be stirred up because a strong wind was blowing. 19 Then, when they had rowed about three or four miles, they saw Jesus walking on the sea and drawing near to the boat; and they were frightened. 20 But He said to them, “It is I; do not be afraid.” 21 So they were willing to receive Him into the boat, and immediately the boat was at the land to which they were going.

22 The next day the crowd that stood on the other side of the sea saw that there was no other small boat there, except one, and that Jesus had not entered with His disciples into the boat, but that His disciples had gone away alone. 23 There came other small boats from Tiberias near to the place where they ate the bread after the Lord had given thanks. 24 So when the crowd saw that Jesus was not there, nor His disciples, they themselves got into the small boats, and came to Capernaum seeking Jesus. 25 When they found Him on the other side of the sea, they said to Him, “Rabbi, when did You get here?”

Words to the People
26 Jesus answered them and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. 27 Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.” 28 Therefore they said to Him, “What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” 30 So they said to Him, “What then do You do for a sign, so that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.’” 32 Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. 33 For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.” 34 Then they said to Him, “Lord, always give us this bread.”

35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”

Words to the Jews
41 Therefore the Jews were grumbling about Him, because He said, “I am the bread that came down out of heaven.” 42 They were saying, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, ‘I have come down out of heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered and said to them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me. 46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father. 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”

52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58 This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.”

Words to the Disciples
59 These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum.

60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it? 61 But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, “Does this cause you to stumble? 62 What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”

Peter’s Confession of Faith
66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. 67 So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68 Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69 We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.” 70 Jesus answered them, “Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is a devil?” 71 Now He meant Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was going to betray Him.

A lot of protestants have issues with eating the body and blood of Yeshua. Sounds kind of gross don't it. Cannibalism! Pagan! Rituals of Cults! Devil worship! Are we suppose to cook Him first? Yuck! Are you kidding me! Christianity has nothing to do with blood of Christ! All you have to do is believe!
 

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,082
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well you can bet that a lot of these thoughts were running through the minds of His disciples and His Apostles.
Two of the worst sacrilegious actions to the Jews was cannibalism and sacrificing pig or a human on the altar in the Temple....the later started the Maccabean revolt in 167 BC.

So if that is the case why was Yeshua requiring something like this?

24 So when the crowd saw that Jesus was not there, nor His disciples, they themselves got into the small boats, and came to Capernaum seeking Jesus. 25 When they found Him on the other side of the sea, they said to Him, “Rabbi, when did You get here?”
Who is He talking to....His disciples and Apostles...but who all was in the crowd....Jewish....Pagan--believers....were they part of the 5,000 that had been feed? People debate this. There were certainly Jews there...verse 41.

With the eating His body and drinking His blood thing, was Christ talking about symbolically. No, absolutely not. You need to look up the instances in the scriptures where Christ said "Truly truly" It is never connected to symbolism. It means "this is a matter of fact or a matter of truth" and it is serious. He is never kidding when He says that!

So Yeshua knew that this would be controversial. Why not just have a dinner with the Apostles and let it go? Why cause trouble? People are debating even today what happens to the bread and wine...do they change, do they not change. Is it transubstantiation or consubstantiation? The Bible does not say either one. All we have is...26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is My body.” 27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. The defining description of what they were about to eat and drink....is the word "is"....not like my body and blood.

Still no hint of
symbolism, but He is not saying He is changing the bread and wine...He is just straight up saying "this is my body" Not like my body and "this is my blood" Not like my blood. Now was He lying or playing a prank or kidding. Don't think so. Did He have the power to do such a thing! Count the miracles in Chapter 7. Yes He did have the power to do such a thing! But honestly I do not think anyone knows exactly why it was so important. But Christ explained what would happen to you if you did not do it....
53 “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.
No life in you!! What kind of life was He talking about? The scriptures say eternal life.

Then what will happen if you do eat His body and drink His Blood....

27 Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.”

40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”

47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”

51 I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”

54 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

So is it important for Christians to have eternal life? If you are a Christian, what is it like to not have eternal life?

56 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.

So is it important for Christians to abide in Christ and He in us?

He said, He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.
Is it important to Christians that Christ raises them on the last day?

So what is it like for a Christian not to have any life in them? Or not abide in Christ? Or not be raised on the last day? I mean really what will happen? So you are a believing Christian but Christ does not raise you on the last day because you have no life in you and you did not abide in Him? I am not sure, I am just asking the questions, but it will not be me because I believe in what Christ said and I have participated in the Bread and Wine ritual.

But then there is belief in it. Like Baptism if you do not believe what it does...do you just get wet? If you do not believe what the Bread and Wine ritual does....do you just have bread and wine in your stomach? [Or Kool-Aid and a cracker in your stomach as most perform the ritual] Christianity is all about belief and faith. So what did Christ say about believing in the Bread and Wine ritual?

47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”

And some believe that you should do what Yeshua told us to do.

Now going back to conversation....what did His disciples say...what was their reaction.

60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?
And why not! This was shocking.
So what did they do?

66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore.
So what happened to them? Did they lose faith in Christ? Did they go to hell?
So what did Yeshua say to His Apostles?

67 So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68 Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69 We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”

Those that have issues with the blood of Christ and the significance thereof, need to do a study about what the blood of Christ did... what was the blood of Christ all about. It is much more than symbolic. According to Christ Himself the performance of this ritual and belief in this ritual is absolutely necessary to have eternal life. Your choice!
 
Last edited:

MatthewG

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2021
14,080
4,919
113
33
Fyffe
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well you can bet that a lot of these thoughts were running through the minds of His disciples and His Apostles.
Two of the worst sacrilegious actions to the Jews was cannibalism and sacrificing pig or a human on the altar in the Temple....the later started the Maccabean revolt in 167 BC.

So if that is the case why was Yeshua requiring something like this?

24 So when the crowd saw that Jesus was not there, nor His disciples, they themselves got into the small boats, and came to Capernaum seeking Jesus. 25 When they found Him on the other side of the sea, they said to Him, “Rabbi, when did You get here?”
Who is He talking to....His disciples and Apostles...but who all was in the crowd....Jewish....Pagan--believers....were they part of the 5,000 that had been feed? People debate this. There were certainly Jews there...verse 41.

With the eating His body and drinking His blood thing, was Christ talking about symbolically. No, absolutely not. You need to look up the instances in the scriptures where Christ said "Truly truly" It is never is connected to symbolism. It means "this is a matter of fact or a matter of truth" and it is serious. He is never kidding when He says that!

So Yeshua knew that this would be controversial. Why not just have a dinner with the Apostles and let it go? Why cause trouble? People are debating even today what happens to the bread and wine...do they change, do they not change. Is it transubstantiation or consubstantiation? The Bible does not say either one. All we have is...26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is My body.” 27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

Still no hint of symbolizes, but He is not saying He is changing the bread and wine...He is just straight up saying "this is my body" Not like my body and "this is my blood" Not like my blood. Now was He lying or playing a prank or kidding. Don't think so. Did He have the power to do such a thing! Count the miracles in Chapter 7. Yes He did have the power to do such a thing! But honestly I do not think anyone knows exactly why it was so important. But Christ explained what would happen to you if you did not do it....
53 “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.
No life in you!! What kind of life was He talking about?

Then what will happen if you do eat His body and drink His Blood....

27 Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.”


40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”

47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”

51 I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”

54 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

So is it important for Christians to have eternal life? If you are a Christian, what is it like to not have eternal life?

56 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.

So is it important for Christians to abide in Christ and He in us?
He said, He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.
Is it important to Christians that Christ raises them on the last day?

So what is it like for a Christian not to have any life in them? Or not abide in Christ? Or not be raised on the last day? I mean really what will happen? You are believing Christian but Christ does not raise you on the last day because you have no life in you and you did not abide in Him? I am not sure, I am just asking the questions, but it will not be me because I believe in what Christ said and I have participated in the Bread and Wine ritual.

But then there is belief in it. Like Baptism if you do not believe what it does...do you just get wet? If you do not believe what the Bread and Wine ritual does....do you just have bread and wine in your stomach? [Or Kool-Aid and a cracker in your stomach as most perform the ritual] Christianity is all about belief and faith.
And some believe that you should do what Yeshua told us to do.

Now going back to conversation....what did His disciples say...what was their reaction.

60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?
And why not! This was shocking.
So what did they do?

66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore.
So what happened to them? Did they lose faith in Christ? Did they go to hell?
So what did Yeshua say to His Apostles?

67 So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68 Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69 We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”

Those that have issues with the blood of Christ and the significance thereof, need to do a study of what the blood of Christ did...what was the blood of Christ all about. It is much more than symbolic. According to Christ Himself the performance of this ritual and belief in this ritual is absolutely necessary to have eternal life. Your choice!

You’re right about that.

His blood was perfect, and I believe eating it is reading and facing his death, and resurrection.

The bread is watching his life as he lived it and watching it by reading about it.

The allowing yourself to abide in his death, and abiding in newness of life by the spirit.

could be wrong though it is how I take the eating and drinking.
 

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,082
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You’re right about that.

His blood was perfect, and I believe eating it is reading and facing his death, and resurrection.

The bread is watching his life as he lived it and watching it by reading about it.

The allowing yourself to abide in his death, and abiding in newness of life by the spirit.

could be wrong though it is how I take the eating and drinking.

Be sure and certain that what Christ said is true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MatthewG