Question on John 19:30

[Arch Stanton]

The universal church is invisible.

Mt 5:14

 

[Eleanor]

You must reconcile your understanding of this with apostolic understanding in Eph 2:8-9,
where salvation to eternal life is by faith. . .not by works (of eating the Lord's Supper),
keeping in mind that Paul received his gospel by revelation from Jesus Christ personally (Gal 1:11-12).

Keep in mind these are not words passed on by St. Paul.... these are Christ's own words --

Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you DO NOT HAVE LIFE within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For MY FLESH IS TRUE FOOD, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.

Are you suggesting dichotomy or conflict between Christ and Paul, who received his gospel from Christ personally (Gal 1:11-12)?

The conflict is not between Paul and Christ, the conflict is between the unerring word of God and your incorrect understanding of it there.

 

[Arch Stanton]

The conflict is not between Paul and Christ

exactly... but you defend Paul without understanding Christ

 

[Eleanor]

exactly... but you defend Paul without understanding Christ

Feel free to reconcile the two according to your understanding of them, and in agreement with all the NT.

 

[Arch Stanton]

Feel free to reconcile the two according to your understanding of them, and in agreement with all the NT.

go for it... it is you who is denying what Christ says, not me...

 

[Eleanor]

go for it... it is you who is denying what Christ says, not me...

So you can't reconcile them. . .

The gospels to the Jews are in Jewish terms--the kingdom,
while the epistles are in apostolic terms-- salvation from God's condemnation of all mankind (Ro 5:18).

In the gospel given to he Jews, being in the kingdom was the goal, while in the epistles salvation is the goal.

The reconciliation lies in not confusing the nature of the kingdom in the Gospel parables given to the Jews where, being in the kingdom was the goal, where in the parables being in the kingdom does not necessarily mean being of the kingdom.

While in NT doctrine of salvation in the epistles, only those in Christ are saved and in the kingdom, there are no saved otherwise, no those in the kingdom but not of the kingdom.

 

[Arch Stanton]

So you can't reconcile them. . .

can

Whereas in NT doctrine of the epistles, only those in Christ are saved, there are none ov

being saved

 

[Eleanor]

can

being saved

Salvation is
past - saved by faith, not by works (Eph 2:8-9), from the wrath of God (Ro 5:9) on sin at the Judgment,
present - sanctification by obedience in the Holy Spirit (Ro 6:19) and
future - the resurrection (1 Co 15:51-52),

all part of the one salvation from God's wrath (Ro 5:9) and adoption as sons.

 

[Arch Stanton]

Salvation is
past - saved by faith, not by works (Eph 2:8-9), from the wrath of God (Ro 5:9) on sin at the Judgment,
present - sanctification by obedience in the Holy Spirit (Ro 6:19) and
future - the resurrection (1 Co 15:51-52),

all part of the one salvation from God's wrath (Ro 5:9) and adoption as sons.

As St. Paul says... we have a race to run

 

[Eleanor]

As St. Paul says... we have a race to run

Agreed. . .that is present salvation of sanctification by obedience in the Holy Spirit (Ro 6:19).

Where there is no present salvation, there was no past salvation, for the two come in the same package.

 

[makesends]

Are you suggesting dichotomy or conflict between Christ and Paul, who received his gospel from Christ personally (Gal 1:11-12)?

The conflict is not between Paul and Christ, the conflict is between the unerring word of God and your incorrect understanding of it there.

While claiming the reliability of Scriptures, the RCC apparently allows @Arch Stanton to find some parts of it "more true" than others parts!

 

[makesends]

Salvation is
past - saved by faith, not by works (Eph 2:8-9), from the wrath of God (Ro 5:9) on sin at the Judgment,
present - sanctification by obedience in the Holy Spirit (Ro 6:19) and
future - the resurrection (1 Co 15:51-52),

all part of the one salvation from God's wrath (Ro 5:9) and adoption as sons.

And, @Arch Stanton , the one salvation —past, present and future— are all three tenses as sure as God's Decree. What he has begun he will complete. It is, after all, for his sake he is doing this, and for God to speak it into fact is to do it.

 

[David1701]

and yet the 'accidents remain' so there goes the cannibalism.... now, the Romans thought as you do -- eating flesh

What do you mean by the "accidents remain"?

 

[Arch Stanton]

What do you mean by the "accidents remain"?

In the Eucharist, after the priest consecrates the bread and wine and they are, in fact, transubstantiated into the body, blood, soul and divinity of our Lord, our Lord is then entirely present. Neither bread nor wine remains. However, the accidents of bread and wine (size, weight, taste, texture) do remain. Hence, the essential reason why Catholics are not guilty of cannibalism is the fact that we do not receive our Lord in a cannibalistic form. We receive him in the form of bread and wine. [CA]

 

[Mr GLee]

In the Eucharist, after the priest consecrates the bread and wine and they are, in fact, transubstantiated into the body, blood, soul and divinity of our Lord, our Lord is then entirely present. Neither bread nor wine remains. However, the accidents of bread and wine (size, weight, taste, texture) do remain. Hence, the essential reason why Catholics are not guilty of cannibalism is the fact that we do not receive our Lord in a cannibalistic form. We receive him in the form of bread and wine. [CA]

I would offer .We are informed that whatsoever goes into our mouth enters ones upper stomach then the lowered in the end comes out as draught and must be buried outside the camp, it cannot enter one heart or soul . therefore teaching cannibalism, reincarnation .

The parable, signified tongue of prophecy using the temporal things seen to give us the unseen spiritual understanding. . to the same spiritual not seen gospel understanding .It must be applied as the proper hermeneutics freely given to us .


1 Corinthians 2:13-14 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

The parable drink blood eat flesh must be compared to other like parables .The parable in John 6 is strengthened by the same drink blood eat flesh In both (1 Chronicles 11:19) and below the witness of two working as one.

In the parable David is used to represent the sufferings of the Son of man. Jesus . The metaphor "Bethlehem" meaning "city of bread to represent flesh. . . .near the metaphor the well of the living gospel water. Three is used throughout the bible to represent the end of a spiritual matter. three apostles used to represent the. . Pouring out of His living Holy Spirit on dying mankind in jeapordy of His own Spirit life .

Changing living water into the blood of grapes the fruit of eternal life


2 Samuel 23:14-17-And David was then in an hold, and the garrison of the Philistines was then in Bethlehem. And David longed, and said, Oh that one would give me drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem(city of bread) , which is by the gate! And the three mighty men brake through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, and took it, and brought it to David: nevertheless he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord.And he said, Be it far from me, O Lord, that I should do this: is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? therefore he would not drink it. These things did these three mighty men.

The word Jeopardy is used that way throughout

Luke 8:23But as they sailed he fell asleep: and there came down a storm of wind on the lake; and they were filled with water, and were in jeopardy.

1 Corinthians 15:30 And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?

 

[David1701]

In the Eucharist, after the priest consecrates the bread and wine and they are, in fact, transubstantiated into the body, blood, soul and divinity of our Lord, our Lord is then entirely present. Neither bread nor wine remains. However, the accidents of bread and wine (size, weight, taste, texture) do remain. Hence, the essential reason why Catholics are not guilty of cannibalism is the fact that we do not receive our Lord in a cannibalistic form. We receive him in the form of bread and wine. [CA]

Thanks for explaining; however, that's sophistry...

 

[Arch Stanton]

Thanks for explaining;

any time

 

[makesends]

In the Eucharist, after the priest consecrates the bread and wine and they are, in fact, transubstantiated into the body, blood, soul and divinity of our Lord, our Lord is then entirely present. Neither bread nor wine remains. However, the accidents of bread and wine (size, weight, taste, texture) do remain. Hence, the essential reason why Catholics are not guilty of cannibalism is the fact that we do not receive our Lord in a cannibalistic form. We receive him in the form of bread and wine. [CA]

"precept upon precept", "a little here, a little there"

 

[Arch Stanton]

"precept upon precept", "a little here, a little there"

Mt 26: 26-28 [The Lord’s Supper] While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.

 

[Mr GLee]

Mt 26: 26-28 [The Lord’s Supper] While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.

What did he have in his hand and what did it represent as a metaphor used in that parable ?.

Bread = flesh

Blood = blood of grapes . .non fermented grape Juice . They both enter ones mouth down through the stomachs and come out as draught

Are you without understanding also?

Mark 7:18-20King James Version18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats? And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.

It must be buried outside the camp..

Christ in us the hope of His Glory not the draught.