Introduction & BIG question: Can I be both Catholic & Baptist?

[BobRyan]

Your own EWTN makes the claim that Billy Graham would have been burned alive during the dark ages of the Catholic Church -- had he taught then... what he taught in the 20th century.

Good grief, that was then and now is now. The Protestants no longer throw Catholics in the dungeon before lopping their heads off now either. Mankind has thankfully changed from such behavior

As I said before - I have no problem declaring crimes against humanity to be --- crimes against humanity.

But I have a hard time with those who try to put a nice face on crimes against humanity.

 

[utilyan]

Here we just state objective historic fact.

Wycliffe, Huss, Jerome, Luther, Calvin -- all of them "baptized catholics" so why in the world would I argue that the 25 million that your own Pope Benedict claims that the RCC killed - could not include baptized Catholics??

As for the Waldenses, Albigensis, Huguenots etc all being "baptized catholics" -- well I doubt it ... in fact we ALL doubt that all of them were "baptized catholic".

My argument is that circling the wagons around an ecumenical council like LATERAN IV and declaring its decrees to be 'infallible' - would mean that the "extermination decrees" are infallible - which would make crimes against humanity infallible -- which we all know is a bad idea.




Sadly you imagine that we will be fooled by your "all in one year" hypothesis - when in fact the Bible says the killing takes place over 1260 years. Who is supposed to be fooled by that?

me??

Try another tactic. something that is believable.

Hint - it is your own Pope Benedict claiming that the RCC killed that 25 million according to RC records AND it is his own statement that this is in fact under-reporting since more than half of the records are not being reported in that 25 million!!



Tell that to the 25 million killed by the RCC.

Tell that to your own Jesuit university (Fordham) that translates the LATERAN IV document for us.

Please be serious.

Half the records.....We are saying state one record. Where did you pick up your LIE?

The ellen g white history book?

 

[DHK]

So we can readily see that I am maintaining the Church's position correctly, you are the one who is in error.

is more like it. You state the position of the Catechism correctly, and technically it is a "re-presentation" of his sacrifice, according to the RCC. But that is confused logic.
It presents the case of idolatry, worshiping a piece of bread where Christ supposedly resides. After all that is what transubstantiation is, isn't it? Not only do you worship it, then you take it, masticate it, digest it, and ejest it. Christ comes in and also makes his exit--the precise thing he taught against.

Mat 15:10 And he called the people to him and said to them, "Hear and understand:
Mat 15:11 it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person."

Mat 15:17 Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled?
Mat 15:18 But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. (ESV)
--You treat Christ as a morsel of food that goes in one end and is expelled at the other end, just as he taught. That is not important. Thus Christ is not important to you. Transubstantiation makes it that way. He is just a morsel of food to be digested.

Someone once asked: What if a rat ate some of the "holy bread" before it got to the communicants? Would the rat be filled with Christ?
Such superstitions in the RCC!!

 

[utilyan]

is more like it. You state the position of the Catechism correctly, and technically it is a "re-presentation" of his sacrifice, according to the RCC. But that is confused logic.
It presents the case of idolatry, worshiping a piece of bread where Christ supposedly resides. After all that is what transubstantiation is, isn't it? Christ comes in and also makes his exit--the precise thing he taught against.

Mat 15:10 And he called the people to him and said to them, "Hear and understand:
Mat 15:11 it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person."

Mat 15:17 Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled?
Mat 15:18 But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. (ESV)
--You treat Christ as a morsel of food that goes in one end and is expelled at the other end, just as he taught. That is not important. Thus Christ is not important to you. Transubstantiation makes it that way. He is just a morsel of food to be digested.

Someone once asked: What if a rat ate some of the "holy bread" before it got to the communicants? Would the rat be filled with Christ?
Such superstitions in the RCC!!

Matthew 26

26While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” 27And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; 28for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.

We believe Jesus Christ. We don't question his word against our understanding of reality.

He didn't say this is the parable of my body and blood.


Your better off arguing against the omnipresence of God. If you cant even grasp one place declared by Jesus Christ, how can you grasp anywhere else?

Jeremiah 23
24“Can a man hide himself in hiding places
So I do not see him?” declares the LORD.
“Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?” declares the LORD.


What he CALLS his body and blood is his prerogative and it only remains his body and blood as it remains recognizably Bread and Wine.


"Not only do you worship it, then you take it, masticate it, digest it, and ejest it."

Jesus used word closer to GNAW. MUNCH. Which couldn't pass for anything metaphorically
John 6.

And more importantly in John 6, he states a miracle will support his claim.

John 6

60Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?” 61But 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?


Its not OH you don't believe I'm PRETENDING SYMBOLICLY you must eat my body and drink my blood.

He said they going to SEE him rise to heaven as a validation to really eat his body and drink his blood.

Did Jesus resurrect and rise only symbolically? NO. He did it and he did it FOR REAL.

 

[Yeshua1]

There is plenty of proof for Catholic doctrine from the Scriptures and the historical record is on our side for there being but one Universal (Catholic) Christian Church - you simply reject the overwhelming evidence.

Who were the Early Church Fathers? Why the Bishop's of the one Universal (Catholic) Church that's who. They were the one's who developed the doctrine of the Trinity, gave us the New Testament as we know it, and fought against the various heresies that arose as the newly developing Christian Church went forward.

IF ALL of the Church fathers held to one position, and the Bible taught us another, then we MUST stand upon the word of God alone!

And there was NO Catholic Church/papacy as held to be now until well after the early Church!

What is the Universal church per the Bible? NOT any organization such as baptists/church of Rome, but all those saved by Grace Of God....

 

[Yeshua1]

Why offer himself at all though you ask? You read what I post but somehow do not comprehend. There was but one sacrifice on the Cross, sufficient for all time and for all souls here on earth - that is what the Church most assuredly teaches. We simply follow Christ's command, (like all Christians should) that we do the same by re-enacting what happened in that fateful time as the permanent memorial to his sacrifice. As I posted earlier: "Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering". You might not accept this, but it is what it is.

Why take the Mass? Do you hold that we must partake of all of the sacraments then in order to get right enough to have God be able to really merit to us salvation then?

 

[BobRyan]

Half the records.....We are saying state one record. Where did you pick up your LIE?

The ellen g white history book?

I told you that the source is your own Pope Benedict... your argument seems to be that anything Benedict would say is a lie...

How "odd".

 

[BobRyan]

Testimonies for the Church, vol. 8, Page 269

"Wonderful statement! The unity that exists between Christ and His disciples does not destroy the personality of either. They are one in purpose, in mind, in character, but not in person. It is thus that God and Christ are one." -- Ellen G White.

Good quote.


The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.
quote of Ellen White in her book - "Evangelism" p. 617. Citing Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 10, p. 37. (l897)

Bob, here your Holy Infallible Prophet wrote in your holy scripture, There is no trinity.
.

Interesting that you become that befuddled when it comes to " the power of God in the third person of the Godhead"

 

[BobRyan]

We get to take a crack at them SDA's right?

Hey bob in which race of men is obvious we are amalgamation with animals?
From Wikipedia:
"Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood.
--Ellen G White.
" .

Good quote.

=========== more of the SAME --

===============================================================


Gen 1 26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 Then God blessed them

Gen 6:11 11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.

"But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere". …. {1SP 69.1}


==============================================================


Ezek 3 17 “Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel; therefore hear a word from My mouth, and give them warning from Me: 18 When I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life, that same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand. 19 Yet, if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you have delivered your soul. (Ezekiel 3)

QUOTE == from http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=9611

NIH Plans To Lift Ban On Research Funds For Part-Human, Part-Animal Embryo

by Rob Stein, NPR
August 4th, 2016

The federal government announced plans Thursday to lift a moratorium on funding of certain controversial experiments that use human stem cells to create animal embryos that are partly human.

The National Institutes of Health is proposing a new policy to permit scientists to get federal money to make embryos, known as chimeras, under certain carefully monitored conditions.

The NIH imposed a moratorium on funding these experiments in September because they could raise ethical concerns.

One issue is that scientists might inadvertently create animals that have partly human brains, endowing them with some semblance of human consciousness or human thinking abilities. Another is that they could develop into animals with human sperm and eggs and breed, producing human embryos or fetuses inside animals or hybrid creatures.

But scientists have argued that they could take steps to prevent those outcomes and that the embryos provide invaluable tools for medical research.

For example, scientists hope to use the embryos to create animal models of human diseases, which could lead to new ways to prevent and treat illnesses. Researchers also hope to produce sheep, pigs and cows with human hearts, kidneys, livers, pancreases and possibly other organs that could be used for transplants.

To address the ethical concerns, the NIH's new policy imposes several restrictions.

But the policy would lift the moratorium on funding experiments involving other species. Because of the ethical concerns, though, at least some of the experiments would go through an extra layer of review by a new, special committee of government officials.

That committee would, for example, consider experiments designed to create animals with human brain cells or human brain tissue. Scientists might want to create them to study neurological conditions such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. But the experiments would undergo intensive scrutiny if there's any chance there might be a "substantial contribution" or "substantial functional modification" to an animal's brain.

---
In addition, the NIH would even consider experiments that could create animals with human sperm and human eggs since they may be useful for studying human development and infertility. But in that case steps would have to be taken to prevent the animals from breeding.

"I am confident that these proposed changes will enable the NIH research community to move this promising area of science forward in a responsible manner," Carrie Wolinetz, the NIH's associate director for science policy, wrote in a blog post.

"At the end of the day, we want to make sure this research progresses because its very important to our understanding of disease. It's important to our mission to improve human health," she said in an interview with NPR. "But we also want to make sure there's an extra set of eyes on these projects because they do have this ethical set of concerns associated with them."

Several scientists said they are thrilled by the new policy. "It's very, very welcome news that NIH will consider funding this type of research," says Pablo Ross, a developmental biologist at the University of California, Davis, trying to grow human organs in farm animals. "We need funding to be able to answer some very important questions."

But critics denounced the decision. "Science fiction writers might have imagined worlds like this — like The Island of Dr. Moreau, Brave New World, Frankenstein," says Stuart Newman, a biologist at New York Medical College. "There have been speculations. But now they're becoming more real. And I think that we just can't say that since it's possible then let's do it."

The public has 30 days to comment on the proposed new policy. NIH could start funding projects as early as the start of 2017.

===== clic on the "Comment" word to ... comment. =====================
===========================================================

 

[BobRyan]

Half the records.....We are saying state one record. Where did you pick up your LIE?

The ellen g white history book?

Your argument that "all news is good news or else a lie" when it comes to the RCC - is not a serious look at history.

As Catholic Christians we should never deny the truth of mistakes made by the Catholic Church in the past. St. John Paul II The Great made this clear when he apologized for the many failings of the Catholic Church and among them are:

• The legal process on the Italian scientist and philosopher Galileo Galilei, himself a devout Catholic, around 1633 (31 October 1992).]

• Catholics' involvement with the African slave trade (9 August 1993).

• The Church's role in burnings at the stake and the religious wars that followed the Protestant Reformation (May 1995, in the Czech Republic).

• The injustices committed against women, the violation of women's rights and for the historical denigration of women (29 May 1995, in a "letter to women").

• The inactivity and silence of many Catholics during the Holocaust (16 March 1998).

• For the execution of Jan Hus in 1415 (18 December 1999 in Prague). When John Paul II visited Prague in 1990s, he requested experts in this matter "to define with greater clarity the position held by Jan Hus among the Church's reformers, and acknowledged that "independently of the theological convictions he defended, Hus cannot be denied integrity in his personal life and commitment to the nation's moral education." It was another step in building a bridge between Catholics and Protestants

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning

This thread will be closed some time after 1200 am Pacific.

 

[DHK]

Matthew 26

26While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” 27And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; 28for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.

We believe Jesus Christ. We don't question his word against our understanding of reality.

He didn't say this is the parable of my body and blood.

He didn't say this is the parable of my door, the parable of my vine, the parable of my shepherd, etc. etc.
Jesus spoke in metaphors. You either don't understand them or deliberately deny them.
To say this is not a metaphor is to state that the disciples of Christ are cannibals. Are they?
Did they eat his flesh and drink his blood, or was it a metaphor meaning something else just like he meant something else when He said "I am the door."

Your better off arguing against the omnipresence of God. If you cant even grasp one place declared by Jesus Christ, how can you grasp anywhere else?

I do believe in the omnipresence of God. You are the one who believes that he is in the confines of a wafer. It is ridiculous superstition.

Jeremiah 23
24“Can a man hide himself in hiding places
So I do not see him?” declares the LORD.
“Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?” declares the LORD.

Good scripture. I like it too.

What he CALLS his body and blood is his prerogative and it only remains his body and blood as it remains recognizably Bread and Wine.

You question God's words and tell us they mean something other than he intended. Rather blasphemous isn't it? But then, the entire Mass is blasphemous, i.e. an insult in the face of God.
You take the words of Jesus and twist them to mean something other than what he said, and then build some perverted doctrine on it.

"Not only do you worship it, then you take it, masticate it, digest it, and ejest it."

Jesus used word closer to GNAW. MUNCH. Which couldn't pass for anything metaphorically
John 6.

And more importantly in John 6, he states a miracle will support his claim.

John 6

60Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?” 61But 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?

You take scripture out of context, and then twist it for your own purposes. Consider what it says:
Joh 6:23-25
(23) (Howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias nigh unto the place where they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks
(24) When the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for Jesus.
(25) And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?
Joh 6:26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
--They followed all the way across the sea for one basic purpose--they saw his miracles, especially the one of multiplying bread, and they wanted more food.

He had fed 5,000 MEN, but including women and children the number could have been as high as 20,000. But then the venue changed.
When Jesus said this:
Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
--He was speaking of faith and eternal life. But where was he?

Joh 6:59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.
--He wasn't out in the open as he was before. He wasn't talking to the public. You conflate so many verses; you are confused.

Then, as he exits the synagogue,
Joh 6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
Joh 6:61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
Joh 6:62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
--But the word "disciple" here simply means "follower." There were many that followed after him. He was not speaking of those who would come his apostles.

This is evident, for John writes:
Joh 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
--They were disciples as in followers, but not true believers.

Then Jesus turns to those disciples that are true disciples and will eventually become the apostles and says:
Joh 6:67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

Their answer?
Joh 6:68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
Joh 6:69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
--His words were the words of eternal life. That is what he believed. Not his blood, not his body, but his words. Believing in his words would give them eternal life. These disciples never left him.

Its not OH you don't believe I'm PRETENDING SYMBOLICLY you must eat my body and drink my blood.

One doesn't eat and drink metaphors. Live and learn.

He said they going to SEE him rise to heaven as a validation to really eat his body and drink his blood.

Did Jesus resurrect and rise only symbolically? NO. He did it and he did it FOR REAL.

No he did not say that. Read what I posted. You are confused.

 

[Adonia]

Why take the Mass? Do you hold that we must partake of all of the sacraments then in order to get right enough to have God be able to really merit to us salvation then?

As a person with free will, you can choose any which way you so desire to worship God. For me, I believe that the Church rightly teaches we must partake of all the sacraments in order to be a good Christian and to worship God properly.

 

[Adonia]

He didn't say this is the parable of my door, the parable of my vine, the parable of my shepherd, etc. etc.
Jesus spoke in metaphors. You either don't understand them or deliberately deny them.
To say this is not a metaphor is to state that the disciples of Christ are cannibals. Are they?
Did they eat his flesh and drink his blood, or was it a metaphor meaning something else just like he meant something else when He said "I am the door."

I do believe in the omnipresence of God. You are the one who believes that he is in the confines of a wafer. It is ridiculous superstition.


Good scripture. I like it too.


You question God's words and tell us they mean something other than he intended. Rather blasphemous isn't it? But then, the entire Mass is blasphemous, i.e. an insult in the face of God.
You take the words of Jesus and twist them to mean something other than what he said, and then build some perverted doctrine on it.


You take scripture out of context, and then twist it for your own purposes. Consider what it says:
Joh 6:23-25
(23) (Howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias nigh unto the place where they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks
(24) When the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for Jesus.
(25) And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?
Joh 6:26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
--They followed all the way across the sea for one basic purpose--they saw his miracles, especially the one of multiplying bread, and they wanted more food.

He had fed 5,000 MEN, but including women and children the number could have been as high as 20,000. But then the venue changed.
When Jesus said this:
Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
--He was speaking of faith and eternal life. But where was he?

Joh 6:59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.
--He wasn't out in the open as he was before. He wasn't talking to the public. You conflate so many verses; you are confused.

Then, as he exits the synagogue,
Joh 6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
Joh 6:61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
Joh 6:62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
--But the word "disciple" here simply means "follower." There were many that followed after him. He was not speaking of those who would come his apostles.

This is evident, for John writes:
Joh 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
--They were disciples as in followers, but not true believers.

Then Jesus turns to those disciples that are true disciples and will eventually become the apostles and says:
Joh 6:67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

Their answer?
Joh 6:68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
Joh 6:69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
--His words were the words of eternal life. That is what he believed. Not his blood, not his body, but his words. Believing in his words would give them eternal life. These disciples never left him.

One doesn't eat and drink metaphors. Live and learn.

No he did not say that. Read what I posted. You are confused.

How dare you call the Catholic Mass blasphemous! You are nothing but an ignorant person and the day is coming when you will stand in judgement for your hateful and evil remarks. You have no respect for anyone else here be it us Catholics or SDA's. Shame on you and your Westboro Baptist Church type of thinking.

 

[utilyan]

He didn't say this is the parable of my door, the parable of my vine, the parable of my shepherd, etc. etc.
Jesus spoke in metaphors. You either don't understand them or deliberately deny them.
To say this is not a metaphor is to state that the disciples of Christ are cannibals. Are they?
Did they eat his flesh and drink his blood, or was it a metaphor meaning something else just like he meant something else when He said "I am the door."

I do believe in the omnipresence of God. You are the one who believes that he is in the confines of a wafer. It is ridiculous superstition.


Good scripture. I like it too.


You question God's words and tell us they mean something other than he intended. Rather blasphemous isn't it? But then, the entire Mass is blasphemous, i.e. an insult in the face of God.
You take the words of Jesus and twist them to mean something other than what he said, and then build some perverted doctrine on it.


You take scripture out of context, and then twist it for your own purposes. Consider what it says:
Joh 6:23-25
(23) (Howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias nigh unto the place where they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks
(24) When the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for Jesus.
(25) And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?
Joh 6:26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
--They followed all the way across the sea for one basic purpose--they saw his miracles, especially the one of multiplying bread, and they wanted more food.

He had fed 5,000 MEN, but including women and children the number could have been as high as 20,000. But then the venue changed.
When Jesus said this:
Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
--He was speaking of faith and eternal life. But where was he?

Joh 6:59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.
--He wasn't out in the open as he was before. He wasn't talking to the public. You conflate so many verses; you are confused.

Then, as he exits the synagogue,
Joh 6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
Joh 6:61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
Joh 6:62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
--But the word "disciple" here simply means "follower." There were many that followed after him. He was not speaking of those who would come his apostles.

This is evident, for John writes:
Joh 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
--They were disciples as in followers, but not true believers.

Then Jesus turns to those disciples that are true disciples and will eventually become the apostles and says:
Joh 6:67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

Their answer?
Joh 6:68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
Joh 6:69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
--His words were the words of eternal life. That is what he believed. Not his blood, not his body, but his words. Believing in his words would give them eternal life. These disciples never left him.

One doesn't eat and drink metaphors. Live and learn.

No he did not say that. Read what I posted. You are confused.

Yeah Jesus said Door, and vine. And those same disciples didn't say
"Well how is it he is a door!?" or "How can this man be a plant!?"

Because it was OBVIOUS symbolism. But when John 6 rolls around there could be no symbolism no metaphor.

You are the one taking it out of context. Jesus Christ and the disciples were not Americans.

The ancient middle eastern metaphor of eating body and blood was already taken.
As in "I will drink the blood of my enemies"

Plus the word he used was to CHEW on GNAW.

Trogo is something a Lion does to its prey.


It wasn't "Consume" it was to MUNCH ON.


trógó: to gnaw, munch, crunch 5176. trógó




If its "symbolic" fake and pretend he proves NOTHING by resurrection.

John 6

60Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?” 61But 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?


There is nothing "far out" about Jesus being symbolic that would have troubled the apostles or anyone for that matter.

Count how many times the disicples left Jesus. A majority of Christ followers at that moment left.

THE SAME ISSUE TODAY. Everyone could handle previously said vine and branches, being door, being son of God, to be born again spiritually, To believe in him. The disciples had no problem

But this here, this was a problem just like its a problem for you.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

This thread is closed.

Six Hour Warning

This thread will be closed some time after 1200 am Pacific.