Search results

I need a clarification: what does the Book of Job have to do with this question about who came first, Adam & Eve or Nachash & Malachim?

I think everyone agrees with the remembrance aspect of Holy Communion. The issue is whether doing it in remembrance of Christ excludes its also being His actual body and blood. But a point needs to be made here. Regardless of whether those elements are His actual body and blood or not, this...

You think the bread that Christ mentioned in these verses is a reference to verbal words rather than to his actual body. I disagree. Let's leave it at that. We are not going to convince each other.

With Christ truly present in that food, sure. I'm not concerned with the perishability of the bread and wine themselves, any more than I am concerned with the perishability of my own physical body. It's eternal life of my soul that I am concerned with.

Clearly "us guys" do not understand it to be a parable. I'm not Catholic, but even I can see that much. I have asked you why you deem John 6:55 to be parabolic. Are you planning on telling me or not?

I think eating the body and drinking the blood of Christ in communion with believers does accomplish that, by appropriating the benefits of the sacrifice of Christ. Here's why: Think back to Israel’s historic practice of consuming the flesh of sin offerings. The same God who demanded sacrifice...

I haven't ever looked at that question.

Are you a vegetarian or a carnivore? Either way, what has this to do with the topic at hand?

I have a different view of the Biblical landscape. I don't approach Scripture with the notion that I can't understand everything, so I try until I fail. And when I try, I use tools beyond Scripture itself. Such as, by looking at how the early Church Fathers understood it. And by immersing...

That's good. Personally, that hasn't always worked for me.

Because we are all naturally curious about a great many things.

Don't change the subject from the Spirit of Truth (NEVER called "it" despite what you think) to the spirit of the devil. You are trying to analogize by mixing up gendered pronouns. Won;t work.

Doesn't everyone?

I disagree. Some passages lend themselves to more than one reasonable interpretation. In other words, they are ambiguous. Resolving ambiguities is often difficult. Made more so by occasional parables, hyperbole and other literary tools. And sometimes by outright mistakes.

Ah. So I was mistaken about you thinking not every word Christ spoke was parabolic. You view Matt. 13:34 as much more than a descriptor of just His ship-to-shore speech in Galilee. You view it as a descriptor of everything He ever said.

Nonsense. The "it" in this translation (there is no pronoun in the original Greek) refers to the world, not to the Spirit of truth, which is referred to as "him" (and does have that pronoun in the original Greek)

Yes, the gospels record a number of parables. Jesus used them from time to time. But surely you don't think that EVERY WORD HE EVER SPOKE was parabolic, do you? If not, you'd better give us a reason why John 6:55 was a parable. Clearly you think it had to be. Tell us why. I am happy to...

Well shame on ME! sml

Gordon Fee aptly noted that the Corinth Paul knew “was at once the New York, Los Angeles, and Las Vegas of the ancient world.” The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Eerdmans, 2014). There were rich and poor, slave and free, class factions, social rankings, and a bunch of bad habits everywhere...

And perhaps they might say that YOU cannot discern what the blood and body of Christ represents. Or, they might prefer to substitute "is" for "represents." I'll let the speak for themselves.