When Jesus told us to EAT his body, what do you think you are feeding on?

[afaithfulone4u]

Aren't you to be feeding on THE WORD OF GOD? The Bread of life sent from the Father that was broken and passed around so that all could feed on the manna, the food of angels to teach them of the Father's ways.

Why was Jesus placed in the animals feeding trough at his birth on the Feast of Tabernacles as our E-manual to live by being God with us? Because he is the Word of Life that we in our beastly nature must feed upon so that we can be raised up from our beastly nature on all fours unto two feet as a man made in the image of God.

Who does the Bible say Jesus is? He is the Word of life
1 John 1:1-2
1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
2(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us
KJV
Matt 4:4
4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
KJV


And why are we to drink his blood? Because the blood is the Spirit of adoption that guides us into all truth of THE WORD.
The Spirit is the Breath of Life and Jesus is God's Word of life.


John 6:53-58
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
KJV
Rom 8:2
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
KJV

 

[clark thompson]

eat the Word of God I like that it is true

 

[Pilgrimer]

John 6:53-58
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

Amen, and amen!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8iwFiUaQ1M

 

[Selene]

His body.

 

[lforrest]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Even though my church considers [/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt]the [/SIZE]Eucharist [SIZE=10.5pt]to merely be a symbol, I don't believe it that simple. There is a spiritual aspect to it[/SIZE].

 

[afaithfulone4u]

His body.

If this meant his physical body, then why didn't they eat his flesh at the last supper or once he died?
See that is what those who heard him say we must eat his body and drink his blood and they left because they understood him to mean physically eat it... But man does not live by bread alone, but by every WORD that proceedeth from the mouth of God. Jesus is the Word of God that proceedeth from the Father.
Jesus is the Bread of life, the very Word of life Manna that we must feed upon to renew our minds. The blood is the Spirit that we must drink in and be totally filled with for with out the Spirit of life(Breath of life) and the Word of life indwelling us we can not be transformed into the children of God as we would still be in our fallen sinful nature with unclean spirits and only the worlds understanding.
We also as the body of Christ, must feed upon one another... not physically but sharing the Bread that we have been given from God with one another till we come into the unity in Christ for there is only ONE WORD and his true body will be in line with it being without leaven and of the same loaf.

[SIZE=10.5pt]Even though my church considers [/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt]the [/SIZE]Eucharist [SIZE=10.5pt]to merely be a symbol, I don't believe it that simple. There is a spiritual aspect to it[/SIZE].

I do believe that we are absolutely to take communion, yet all the natural bread and wine in the world is not going to make us understand the ways of our spiritual growth in Christ(The Word). The communion is a spiritual act we do in rememberance of Jesus and it also is meant for us to discern that we are part of his body as a whole, united for the work of God, for true believers are to act as one as a holy nation under the guidance of the Spirit in obedience to the Word giving all worship to the Father.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

If this meant his physical body, then why didn't they eat his flesh at the last supper or once he died?
See that is what those who heard him say we must eat his body and drink his blood and they left because they understood him to mean physically eat it... But man does not live by bread alone, but by every WORD that proceedeth from the mouth of God. Jesus is the Word of God that proceedeth from the Father.

There's a lot of misunderstanding about the miracle of transubstantiation. During this transformation the one and singular death and resurrection of Christ is "made present" in the Eucharist, including the Last Supper. When Christ told people they must eat his flesh and drink his blood to have life, he later told his apostles that his words were spirit and they were life (vs 63). So it was never understood to be a literal eating of the flesh of Christ. But what's important is the understanding of the early church when they met weekly for communion. Here, Paul's words cannot be mistaken:

Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. (1Cor 11)\

So prevalent was the understanding that the Eucharist was the body and blood of Christ that Christians were reviled as cannibals and blood drinkers by their enemies. Nowhere in early Christianity is sustained this notion that it merely represented the body and blood of Christ.







I do believe that we are absolutely to take communion, yet all the natural bread and wine in the world is not going to make us understand the ways of our spiritual growth in Christ(The Word). The communion is a spiritual act we do in rememberance of Jesus and it also is meant for us to discern that we are part of his body as a whole, united for the work of God, for true believers are to act as one as a holy nation under the guidance of the Spirit in obedience to the Word giving all worship to the Father.


Perhaps one of the bigger mistakes made among non Catholics is to pit the spiritual against the physical utilizing philosophical premises more in line with Eastern mysticism than Christianity. God uses his creation as icons, windows to heaven, places where the temporal and the divine meet. We are physical creatures. Jesus also remains to this day and forever more, a physical being. And when Jesus returns, there will be a transforming of this planet to its original paradise because heaven too, is a physical place. This is why water baptism, the Eucharist, anointing oil, incense, candles, etc etc are all examples of creation being used to impart spiritual blessings. It was this way in the Old Covenant and certainly continues in the New Covenant.

 

[Mungo]

There's a lot of misunderstanding about the miracle of transubstantiation. During this transformation the one and singular death and resurrection of Christ is "made present" in the Eucharist, including the Last Supper. When Christ told people they must eat his flesh and drink his blood to have life, he later told his apostles that his words were spirit and they were life (vs 63). So it was never understood to be a literal eating of the flesh of Christ.

I'm puzzled that you says it was never to be understood literally.

When we eat the consecated host we eat the literal body of Christ, but under the appearance of bread. It's not a metaphor.

That is what Jesus said: "Take, eat; this is my body." (Mt 26:26)

 

[The_highwayman]

I'm puzzled that you says it was never to be understood literally.

When we eat the consecated host we eat the literal body of Christ, but under the appearance of bread. It's not a metaphor.

That is what Jesus said: "Take, eat; this is my body." (Mt 26:26)

Mungo,
So in Matt 21.21 Jesus said by faith, we could speak to a mountian and move it into the sea. Please show me in the Bible where Jesus or anyone else actually moved a mountian and cast it into the sea.

 

[Mungo]

Mungo,
So in Matt 21.21 Jesus said by faith, we could speak to a mountian and move it into the sea. Please show me in the Bible where Jesus or anyone else actually moved a mountian and cast it into the sea.

Please explain the relevance of this to my comment to This Vale of Tears

 

[The_highwayman]

Please explain the relevance of this to my comment to This Vale of Tears

Mungo,
I thas total relevance to your comments. Please answer

 

[Mungo]

Mungo,
I thas total relevance to your comments. Please answer

And what is the relevance?

Or perhaps if you have a point to make you could make it less cryptically.

 

[The_highwayman]

And what is the relevance?

Or perhaps if you have a point to make you could make it less cryptically.

Mungo,
Did Jesus ever reallly speak to a mountian and tell it to go into the sea?

If not why?

 

[day]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Even though my church considers [/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt]the [/SIZE]Eucharist [SIZE=10.5pt]to merely be a symbol, I don't believe it that simple. There is a spiritual aspect to it[/SIZE].

It is more than just a memorial. It is a channel of grace, a gift of God to the Church, and a renewing of our covenant with Him. (I am speaking from an Anglican perspective, not Catholic, I do not believe in Transubstantiation.)

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

I'm puzzled that you says it was never to be understood literally.

When we eat the consecated host we eat the literal body of Christ, but under the appearance of bread. It's not a metaphor.

That is what Jesus said: "Take, eat; this is my body." (Mt 26:26)

Who are you arguing with? I was responding to a question (why didn't the apostles literally eat Jesus) so there's no need to preach to me about transubstantiation. Follow the conversation and you won't be so puzzled.

Mungo,
Did Jesus ever reallly speak to a mountian and tell it to go into the sea?

If not why?

Jesus was describing a faith that can move mountains. But the spectacular miracles aren't the difficult ones because creation doesn't have a will of its own. The difficult, and therefore more profound miracle is when a human heart is changed. It's much like when the paralyzed man was lowered through the roof and Jesus said, "Your sins are forgiven." People were standing around wondering when Jesus was going to do something and failed to grasp that what Jesus did was far more significant than healing the man's body. People today continue to miss the bigger miracle. They want mountains to leap from their foundations and plunge into the sea. They want a light show and glamour. Few truly appreciate that when a human life is changed by a radical encounter with the risen Christ, it's a miracle that leaves all others in the dust.

 

[The_highwayman]

Who are you arguing with? I was responding to a question (why didn't the apostles literally eat Jesus) so there's no need to preach to me about transubstantiation. Follow the conversation and you won't be so puzzled.

Jesus was describing a faith that can move mountains. But the spectacular miracles aren't the difficult ones because creation doesn't have a will of its own. The difficult, and therefore more profound miracle is when a human heart is changed. It's much like when the paralyzed man was lowered through the roof and Jesus said, "Your sins are forgiven." People were standing around wondering when Jesus was going to do something and failed to grasp that what Jesus did was far more significant than healing the man's body. People today continue to miss the bigger miracle. They want mountains to leap from their foundations and plunge into the sea. They want a light show and glamour. Few truly appreciate that when a human life is changed by a radical encounter with the risen Christ, it's a miracle that leaves all others in the dust.

Vale,
I was using this example to mungo to show him there are many instances in the word, that Jesus was being figurative and literal. Everyone knows that nobody has ever literally moved a mountain and cast it in the sea.

 

[Mungo]

Vale,
I was using this example to mungo to show him there are many instances in the word, that Jesus was being figurative and literal. Everyone knows that nobody has ever literally moved a mountain and cast it in the sea.

Yes, Jesus used figurative language and he also spoke literally.

So what is your point?

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

The three of us are arguing past each other. I don't think there's any profound disagreement here.

 

[Mungo]

The three of us are arguing past each other. I don't think there's any profound disagreement here.

I'll drop out.

That might reduce the problem.

 

[The_highwayman]

Yes, Jesus used figurative language and he also spoke literally.

So what is your point?

Mungo,
Did Jesus really mean we are to eat his real body?