Can you really live by Sola Scriptura?

Status
Not open for further replies.

disciple Clint

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2018
15,258
5,991
Pacific Northwest
✟208,189.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Absolutely Clint, but receiving God's Grace is not separate from faith. We actually receive the gift of God's grace by holding out our hands of faith in God's Word to receive it. That is why it is written in Ephesians 2:8 [8], For by grace are you saved through faith; (in Gods Word - Romans 10:17) and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.
We actually receive the gift of God's grace by holding out our hands of faith in God's Word to receive it.
Have to disagree with that statement. Until God through the Holy Spirit invites us to open our hearts to Him we cannot have faith. We have to receive the grace of God before we can become believers and it is God who initiates that grace.
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
LoveGodsWord said: Absolutely Clint, but receiving God's Grace is not separate from faith. We actually receive the gift of God's grace by holding out our hands of faith in God's Word to receive it. That is why it is written in Ephesians 2:8 [8], For by grace are you saved through faith; (in Gods Word - Romans 10:17) and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.
Your response here
Have to disagree with that statement. Until God through the Holy Spirit invites us to open our hearts to Him we cannot have faith. We have to receive the grace of God before we can become believers and it is God who initiates that grace.
Hi Clint, no problem. Of course you are free to believe whatever you wish as that is between you and God and I do not judge you *John 12:47-48. However, what is there to disagree about? Do you not believe Ephesians 2:8 says we are saved by God's grace through faith and that this faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God in Romans 10:17? These are God's Words not mine so your disagreement is not with me as they are not my words. If our faith comes by the Word of God and without faith it is impossible to please God and whatsoever is not of faith is sin *Hebrews 11:6; Romans 14:23; how can any one of us have Gods grace or salvation if we have no faith in what God's Word says, when faith comes by hearing and reading the Word of God? - We cannot. *John 3:36. According to Peter, God only gives His Spirit to those who believe and obey Him *see Acts of the Apostles 5:29; Acts of the Apostles 2:38; John 6:63. God invites us every time we hear or read His Word to believe it as Gods' Spirit is the Spirit of the Word of God and works through Gods' Word as we have faith *see John 6:63. It is written in Isaiah 6:9-10; Matthew 13:13-15; Acts of the Apostles 28:26-27 "the many that are called" refuse to hear and see God's Word. It is only "the few that believe and follow Gods' Word that are the chosen" *Matthew 22:14; Matthew 7:1-23; John 10:26-27; 1 John 2:3-4. Let's all pray God might help us all to hear and see His Words and follow them and be a part of the few that are the chosen. This is my prayer for everyone here.

Take Care.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Jun 26, 2003
8,127
1,189
Visit site
✟258,241.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Sorry LoveGodsWord, your first paragraph of your reply to me is circular. The word of God is the word of God. The only thing that stands on its own is the Truth. The Scriptures are only a testimony of that Truth, they are not self sufficient.

Disciple Clint, I like your post. I think you are saying we are saved by grace, and faith is a gift we receive at repentance?
We are not saved by faith, rather through faith? I am thinking about this from the words of Jesus and John the Baptist. Both said repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand. When we repent, we are not given faith alone, rather the three theological virtues of faith, Hope and Charity. These can only come to us from God by His grace. Faith to know that He is and is a rewarder of those that seek Him, Hope that He is faithful to His promise and will cleanse us from sin and complete His work in us to prepare us for good works, and Charity which starts with an intense love of God, and we seek ways to obey Him as one seeks to please his lover. Obedience to God includes love of neighbor, but to love God with your whole heart whole mind and whole soul is the first commandment
Even Jesus says if you love me keep My commandments. We do that with the grace He gives us in repentance. Truly a wonderful merciful God we serve
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Sorry LoveGodsWord, your first paragraph of your reply to me is circular. The word of God is the word of God. The only thing that stands on its own is the Truth. The Scriptures are only a testimony of that Truth, they are not self sufficient.

Disciple Clint, I like your post. I think you are saying we are saved by grace, and faith is a gift we receive at repentance?
We are not saved by faith, rather through faith? I am thinking about this from the words of Jesus and John the Baptist. Both said repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand. When we repent, we are not given faith alone, rather the three theological virtues of faith, Hope and Charity. These can only come to us from God by His grace. Faith to know that He is and is a rewarder of those that seek Him, Hope that He is faithful to His promise and will cleanse us from sin and complete His work in us to prepare us for good works, and Charity which starts with an intense love of God, and we seek ways to obey Him as one seeks to please his lover. Obedience to God includes love of neighbor, but to love God with your whole heart whole mind and whole soul is the first commandment
Even Jesus says if you love me keep My commandments. We do that with the grace He gives us in repentance. Truly a wonderful merciful God we serve

Nothing circular at all (see post # 292 linked that explains circular reasoning and logical fallacy). My premise and evidence is scripture that has already been posted and shared for everyone to see. They are God's Words not my words. All you have provided here is no scripture and an opinion unsupported by evidence or scripture. For me only Gods Word is true and we should believe and follow them *Romans 3:4; Matthew 7:21. There is no grace or salvation if we do not have faith and there is no faith without believing and following what God's Word says according to the scriptures *see Ephesians 2:8; Romans 10:17; John 3:36; Romans 14:23; Hebrews 11:6; 1 John 2:3-4. BTW, faith is simply believing and following what God's Word says. Therefore we have to believe and follow what God's Word says before we repent according to the scripture. This is why the scriptures are the only rule of faith because they show us what to believe and follow as God is our guide and teacher (see John 16:13; John 7:17; John 14:26; 1 John 2:27; John 17:17 as we prayerfully seek Him through His Word *Jeremiah 29:13; John 8:31-36

Take Care.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
8,240
3,032
Minnesota
✟212,877.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
[QUOTE="LoveGodsWord, post: 76730063, member: 398970"Simply, I have never disregarded John 6. I discarded your interpretation of John 6 because it is not biblical or supported in scripture. We do not literally eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus. It is literally impossible.[/QUOTE] Your particular interpretation is in conflict with the word of Jesus. Jesus was very clear in John 6. If you know the Koine Greek, Jesus was more and more emphatic that we were to eat His True flesh, that is why many walked away. You say what Jesus told us is impossible, NOTHING is impossible for God.
 
Upvote 0
Jun 26, 2003
8,127
1,189
Visit site
✟258,241.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
[QUOTE="LoveGodsWord, post: 76730063, member: 398970"Simply, I have never disregarded John 6. I discarded your interpretation of John 6 because it is not biblical or supported in scripture. We do not literally eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus. It is literally impossible.
Your particular interpretation is in conflict with the word of Jesus. Jesus was very clear in John 6. If you know the Koine Greek, Jesus was more and more emphatic that we were to eat His True flesh, that is why many walked away. You say what Jesus told us is impossible, NOTHING is impossible for God.[/QUOTE]

Thank you Valletta for pointing that out, as it proves my point in the OP. We cannot depend on Sola Scriptura as our guide. Individuals cannot agree on what the word of God says and we have myriad groups. As the word of God says, all we like sheep have gone astray, we need a shepherd, and we cannot claim Jesus as our Shepherd because He then becomes the Jesus we imagine Him to be, rather than who He is. As John the Baptist said, do not claim you have Abraham as your father. God is able to raise up from these stones children to Abraham.
This proves that we need extra biblical sources to rightly divide the word of truth. For me and my house, I choose the Catholic Church, because she has been around the longest and I have not found any of her doctrines to be unbiblical. Very much the opposite, I receive the sacraments and I am literally cleansed of sin. It is a freeing feeling, praise be to Our Lord Jesus Christ.

LoveGodsWord, I am sorry, but you need to retract your statement in saying it is impossible for Jesus to literally give us His flesh and blood to eat and drink. You directly oppose the word or God. It’s also significant that the disciples recognized Jesus after His resurrection in the breaking of bread, even when He preached to word to them, they did not recognize Him till then. Also significant that the Gospel writers would mention something as trivial as breaking bread, unless it had sacramental significance. It’s not a detail that you would normally report, as it is not normally germane to the topic.
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Your particular interpretation is in conflict with the word of Jesus. Jesus was very clear in John 6. If you know the Koine Greek, Jesus was more and more emphatic that we were to eat His True flesh, that is why many walked away. You say what Jesus told us is impossible, NOTHING is impossible for God.

Hello Val, nice to see you again. If I am being honest with you in reading your post here I see all you have provided here is your opinion unsupported by scripture so we might have to agree to disagree on your claims here. John 6 is not Jesus literally saying to eat His flesh and drink His blood that is impossible. That is something that you and your friend are yet to prove even after providing scripture showing that this is impossible. Tell me how can we literally eat the flesh of Jesus and drink His blood 2000 years after the resurrection? I have posted on this earlier showing why the teaching of transubstantiation (more here linked) which is the literal eating of the flesh of Jesus and drinking His blood is not biblical from the scriptures in post # 27 linked and in post # 38 linked. If you disagree your welcome to show me from the scriptures why you disagree. If you cannot then perhaps you can pray about it. All you have provided here is your opinion unsupported by the scriptures so we will have to agree to disagree.

Take Care.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Thank you Valletta for pointing that out, as it proves my point in the OP. We cannot depend on Sola Scriptura as our guide. Individuals cannot agree on what the word of God says and we have myriad groups. As the word of God says, all we like sheep have gone astray, we need a shepherd, and we cannot claim Jesus as our Shepherd because He then becomes the Jesus we imagine Him to be, rather than who He is. As John the Baptist said, do not claim you have Abraham as your father. God is able to raise up from these stones children to Abraham.This proves that we need extra biblical sources to rightly divide the word of truth. For me and my house, I choose the Catholic Church, because she has been around the longest and I have not found any of her doctrines to be unbiblical. Very much the opposite, I receive the sacraments and I am literally cleansed of sin. It is a freeing feeling, praise be to Our Lord Jesus Christ.

LoveGodsWord, I am sorry, but you need to retract your statement in saying it is impossible for Jesus to literally give us His flesh and blood to eat and drink. You directly oppose the word or God. It’s also significant that the disciples recognized Jesus after His resurrection in the breaking of bread, even when He preached to word to them, they did not recognize Him till then. Also significant that the Gospel writers would mention something as trivial as breaking bread, unless it had sacramental significance. It’s not a detail that you would normally report, as it is not normally germane to the topic.

Sorry dear friend but we might have to agree to disagree. Your friends post hasn't proved your point at all. Your friend simply provided an opinion unsupported by evidence or scripture just like you did earlier and this same person is of the same faith as you. So in essence your post here is simply responding someone from the same faith as you that has not addressed the scriptures in the posts that were provided to you earlier that are in disagreement with you from post # 27 linked and further in post # 38 linked in regards to your belief of transubstantiation (more here linked) the belief that eating and drinking the literal body and blood of Christ. If you are in disagreement with the linked posts provided above your welcome to prove why you disagree from the scriptures as evidence. Providing an opinion stating that you disagree is not evidence but is an opinion unsupported by evidence to why you disagree while providing no scripture in support of why you disagree. So unless your able to provide evidence for your disagreement we might have to agree to disagree. The evidence showing why a teaching of transubstantiation (more here linked) is not biblical has been provided to you in post # 27 linked and further in post # 38 linked. I am still waiting for you to address these posts showing why you do not agree.

Take Care.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Jun 26, 2003
8,127
1,189
Visit site
✟258,241.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Sorry dear friend but we might have to agree to disagree. Your friends post hasn't proved your point at all. Your friend simply provided an opinion unsupported by evidence or scripture just like you did earlier and this same person is of the same faith as you. So in essence your post here is simply responding someone from the same faith as you that has not addressed the scriptures in the posts that were provided to you earlier that are in disagreement with you from post # 27 linked and further in post # 38 linked in regards to your belief of transubstantiation (more here linked) the belief that eating and drinking the literal body and blood of Christ. If you are in disagreement with the linked posts provided above your welcome to prove why you disagree from the scriptures as evidence. Providing an opinion stating that you disagree is not evidence but is an opinion unsupported by evidence to why you disagree while providing no scripture in support of why you disagree. So unless your able to provide evidence for your disagreement we might have to agree to disagree. The evidence showing why a teaching of transubstantiation (more here linked) is not biblical has been provided to you in post # 27 linked and further in post # 38 linked. I am still waiting for you to address these posts showing why you do not agree.

Take Care.

I will answer you, LoveGodsWord, but as this thread is about sola scriptura and not the Eucharist, I will start another one, once I have properly reviewed your material. Until then

peace be with you
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: LoveGodsWord
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
8,240
3,032
Minnesota
✟212,877.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Hello Val, nice to see you again. If I am being honest with you in reading your post here I see all you have provided here is your opinion unsupported by scripture so we might have to agree to disagree on your claims here. John 6 is not Jesus literally saying to eat His flesh and drink His blood that is impossible. That is something that you and your friend are yet to prove even after providing scripture showing that this is impossible. Tell me how can we literally eat the flesh of Jesus and drink His blood 2000 years after the resurrection? I have posted on this earlier showing why the teaching of transubstantiation (more here linked) which is the literal eating of the flesh of Jesus and drinking His blood is not biblical from the scriptures in post # 27 linked and in post # 38 linked. If you disagree your welcome to show me from the scriptures why you disagree. If you cannot then perhaps you can pray about it. All you have provided here is your opinion unsupported by the scriptures so we will have to agree to disagree.

Take Care.
In John 6:50-53 the Koine Greek word used for "eat" are forms of "phago." The Jews find the words of Jesus hard to believe, in John 6:54 forms of the word "trogein" or "trogo" begin to be used for "eat." "Trogein" means to chew, or gnaw, or masticate--when challenged Jesus, instead of telling them it is symbolic, does the opposite and makes it clear that He is speaking literally about eating His flesh. You say what Jesus tells us is impossible. What Jesus says in John 6 is the Word of God, NOTHING is impossible for God. Your opinions are outside of the words Jesus used in Holy Scripture, in contradictory of His words. You are thinking in terms of men, God is FAR above what you and I can comprehend. It is a "hard saying" indeed, Jesus lost many disciples because they could not believe. Prayerfully consider that, it is a warning to us all.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
In John 6:50-53 the Koine Greek word used for "eat" are forms of "phago." The Jews find the words of Jesus hard to believe, in John 6:54 forms of the word "trogein" or "trogo" begin to be used for "eat." "Trogein" means to chew, or gnaw, or masticate--when challenged Jesus, instead of telling them it is symbolic, does the opposite and makes it clear that He is speaking literally about eating His flesh. You say what Jesus tells us is impossible. What Jesus says in John 6 is the Word of God, NOTHING is impossible for God. Your opinions are outside of the words Jesus used in Holy Scripture, in contradictory of His words. You are thinking in terms of men, God is FAR above what you and I can comprehend. It is a "hard saying" indeed, Jesus lost many disciples because they could not believe. Prayerfully consider that, it is a warning to us all.
Indeed but the use of the Greek word for eat φάγω here no one is arguing about and they were never in contention. It is what is being eaten is in contention. Is it the literal flesh and blood of Jesus or the application to Jesus as God's living Word *1 John 1:1-4; 14 where the Word of God becomes flesh according to John 1:14 that we are to eat through believing that leads to everlasting life as shown through the scriptures already in the linked posts from post # 27 linked and in post # 38 linked? The literal eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Jesus has no meaning and the Catholic doctrine of the literal eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood called transubstantiation (more here linked) is not biblical or supported in the scriptures. Please address the linked posts that are in disagreement with you. Jesus says no where in scripture to literally eat His flesh and drink His blood. Your making that part up. You may also want to consider the chapter contexts from John 6:35-64 which is to believing and following what Gods' Word says and not believing. Pray about it and tell me how are you going to literally eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus and what benefit does that have over the application of the scriptures that have already been provided showing that we eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus who is God's Word that became flesh *John 1:1-4; 14 by believing and following what Gods' Word says that leads to everlasting life?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
8,240
3,032
Minnesota
✟212,877.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The literal eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Jesus has no meaning and the Catholic doctrine of the literal eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood called transubstantiation (more here linked) is not biblical or supported in the scriptures.

Jesus is the Lamb of God, the sacrificial lamb. This is why Jesus linked the first mass to the Passover. The Passover feast was not finished until the lamb was eaten:

John 6:53-58 New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition

53 So 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 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day; 55 for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. 56 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.”
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Jesus is the Lamb of God, the sacrificial lamb. This is why Jesus linked the first mass to the Passover. The Passover feast was not finished until the lamb was eaten
Ummm nope. We are in the new covenant now not the old covenant. Is Jesus literally a lamb here or was the lamb a symbol of Jesus as God's sacrifice for the sins of the world once and for all *John 1:29-36; Hebrews 10:10?
John 6:53-58 New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition53 So 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 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day; 55 for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. 56 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.”
Soooo? You posted the scriptures I already quoted but left out the contexts of these scripture that have application to believing Gods Word but you still have not answered or addressed anything in the posts you have been quoting from. How does this support your view that Jesus these scriptures are talking about literally eating the flesh and Christ and drinking His blood and the scriptures not being symbolic to eating the flesh if Jesus by believing and following His Word? As already shown through the scriptures, Jesus is God's living Word of God *1 John 1:1-4; 14. According to the scripture, Jesus as Gods' Word becomes flesh *John 1:14 that we are to eat through believing and following God's Word that leads to everlasting life as shown through the scriptures already in the linked posts from post # 27 linked and in post # 38 linked? The literal eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Jesus has no meaning and the Catholic doctrine of the literal eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood called transubstantiation (more here linked) is not biblical or supported in the scriptures. I am still awaiting a response from you. Pray about it and tell me how are you going to literally eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus and what benefit does that have over the application of the scriptures that have already been provided showing that we eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus who is God's Word that became flesh *John 1:1-4; 14 by believing and following what Gods' Word says that leads to everlasting life?

Take Care.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
8,240
3,032
Minnesota
✟212,877.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Ummm nope. We are in the new covenant now not the old covenant. Is Jesus literally a lamb here or was the lamb a symbol
of Jesus as God's sacrifice for the sins of the world once and for all *John 1:29-36; Hebrews 10:10?

Yes, this is the New Covenant, the old prefigures the new. Jesus Himself is the New Covenant.

20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you.


The literal eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Jesus has no meaning and the Catholic doctrine of the literal eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood called transubstantiation (more here linked) is not biblical or supported in the scriptures.

In John 6:52 Jesus says "Truly, truly, I say unto you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.” You claim the opposite and say "literal eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Jesus has no meaning."
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Yes, this is the New Covenant, the old prefigures the new. Jesus Himself is the New Covenant. 20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you.
Once again where does it say here we literally drink the blood of Christ? - It doesn't. Here let's add the scripture contexts back in...
  • Matthew 26:27-29 [27], And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink you all of it; [28], For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. [29], But I say to you, I will not drink from now on of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.
If you carefully read Matthew 26:27-29 above, you will notice that after Jesus “gave thanks” and proclaimed “this is my blood”, Jesus himself then afterwards called it “fruit of the vine” symbolic of His blood not literal blood.
In John 6:52 Jesus says "Truly, truly, I say unto you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.” You claim the opposite and say "literal eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Jesus has no meaning."
Just as I thought. No response and no answers to the questions asked of you. See post # 311 and post # 313 linked. Where does in say in anything you have posted that we have to literally eat Christs flesh and drink the blood of Jesus? - It doesn't. Just the same as Jesus is literally not a lamb *John 1:29, a shepherd *Matthew 26:31; John 10:11, a door (John 10:9), a river of water *John 4:14 or a loaf of bread *John 6:35. These are all symbols that Jesus used like eating His flesh (The Word became flesh *John 1:1-4; 14) means believing and following His Word and drinking His blood receiving everlasting life. If we do not believe and follow Gods' Word we do not have everlasting life. This is why the scriptures are the only rule of faith because anything else that is not of faith in God's Word is sin *Ephesians 2:8; Romans 14:23. Any teaching therefore that leads us away from God and His Word is not from God.

Hope this is helpful.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
8,240
3,032
Minnesota
✟212,877.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
If you carefully read Matthew 26:27-29 above, you will notice that after Jesus “gave thanks” and proclaimed “this is my blood”, Jesus himself then afterwards called it “fruit of the vine” symbolic of His blood not literal blood.
Jesus never called His blood the fruit of the vine, you are adding to the words of Jesus. Jesus was not going to celebrate the Passover again with the Apostles on this earth.

If you were correct Jesus would have said something like "This is not my true flesh you eat, it is only a symbol of my flesh." Nor did Jesus ever say "Whoever eats a symbol of my flesh and drinks a symbol of my blood." How easy that would have been were the facts changed to your interpretation.

You keep on inserting the word "symbol." In fact, read the passage below carefully and you will see Jesus emphasized that it is truly his own flesh and blood. Note Jesus makes it clears His flesh is "TRUE FOOD" and his blood is "TRUE DRINK."

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. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.” ~ John 6: 52-58
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Jesus never called His blood the fruit of the vine, you are adding to the words of Jesus. Jesus was not going to celebrate the Passover again with the Apostles on this earth.

If you were correct Jesus would have said something like "This is not my true flesh you eat, it is only a symbol of my flesh." Nor did Jesus ever say "Whoever eats a symbol of my flesh and drinks a symbol of my blood." How easy that would have been were the facts changed to your interpretation.

You keep on inserting the word "symbol." In fact, read the passage below carefully and you will see Jesus emphasized that it is truly his own flesh and blood. Note Jesus makes it clears His flesh is "TRUE FOOD" and his blood is "TRUE DRINK."

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. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.” ~ John 6: 52-58

Then we have Gods Word that says....

Matthew 26:27-29 [27], And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink you all of it; [28], For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. [29], But I say to you, I will not drink from now on of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

Matthew 26:27-29 above, shows that after Jesus “gave thanks” and proclaimed “this is my blood”, Jesus himself then afterwards called it “fruit of the vine” symbolic of His blood not literal blood.

No assertions are needed my side as the scriptures teach that Jesus spoke in parables *Matthew 13:34-35 using symbols that have meaning. Just the same as Jesus is not literally a rock *1 Corinthians 10:4, lamb *John 1:29; 1 Peter 1:19, a shepherd *Matthew 26:31; John 10:11, a door *John 10:9, a river of water *John 4:14 or a loaf of bread *John 6:35. These are all symbols that Jesus used like eating His flesh (The Word became flesh *John 1:1-4; 14) means believing and following His Word and drinking His blood receiving everlasting life. If we do not believe and follow Gods' Word we do not have everlasting life.

Still disagree? Where does it say anywhere that Jesus is literally a lamb, a shepherd, water, a door, a rock or bread? When Jesus says in Matthew 26:27-29 to take the cup of the vine representing His blood does it say at the last supper that this was literally the blood of Christ? - Yep no where. So many unanswered question? Perhaps you can pray about it as the scriptures shared with you here do not agree with you and they are Gods Words not mine.

Take Care.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
8,240
3,032
Minnesota
✟212,877.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Then we have Gods Word that says....

Matthew 26:27-29 [27], And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink you all of it; [28], For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. [29], But I say to you, I will not drink from now on of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

Where does in say in anything you have posted that we have to literally eat Christs flesh and drink the blood of Jesus? - It doesn't. Just the same as Jesus is literally not a lamb *John 1:29, a shepherd *Matthew 26:31; John 10:11, a door (John 10:9), a river of water *John 4:14 or a loaf of bread *John 6:35. These are all symbols that Jesus used like eating His flesh (The Word became flesh *John 1:1-4; 14) means believing and following His Word and drinking His blood receiving everlasting life. If we do not believe and follow Gods' Word we do not have everlasting life.

Still disagree? Where does it say anywhere that Jesus is literally a lamb, a shepherd, water, a door, or bread? When Jesus says in Matthew 26:27-29 to take the cup of the vine representing His blood does it say at the last supper that this was literally the blood of Christ? - Yep no where. So many unanswered question? Perhaps you can pray about it as the scriptures shared with you here do not agree with you.

Take Care.
The New Testament books were chosen by the Catholic Church in a process that spanned centuries. The Bible is the book of the Catholic Church, not the other way around. Any text that was not 100 percent in keeping with Catholic teaching was rejected. It has been, since those early centuries, the accepted fact that Jesus spoke literally in John 6. Take the time to read this understanding of the Church in the early centuries. And it is obvious here they took him literally. They questioned Jesus, and Jesus is even more emphatic they are to actually eat (using a Greek word meaning to "chew" his flesh.) When Jesus described himself as a door, his audience did not say "How can this man be made out of wood?" But in John 6 they questioned him as he made it as clear as can be they were to eat His true flesh.

The priesthood in OT times starts with Melchexideck, who offered mere bread and wine.
The old was fulfilled in the new when instead of mere bread and wine, Jesus offered His body and blood, as the lamb of God, both sacrifice and priest. In John 6 Jesus encounters disbelievers, it is a hard saying, and has been a hard saying to accept since that time. I sympathize with you. Saint Ignatius of Antioch commented around 110 A.D. :
They [i.e. the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that THE EUCHARIST IS THE FLESH OF OUR SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. (Letter to Smyrnians 7:1)

Jesus in the Holy Eucharist is our New Covenant, our New Testament. In fact, it was when the Catholic Church was in the process of selecting the books of the Bible that the new books began to be referred to as "books of the New Testament."
 
Upvote 0

LoveGodsWord

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
22,242
6,634
Queensland
Visit site
✟252,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The New Testament books were chosen by the Catholic Church in a process that spanned centuries. The Bible is the book of the Catholic Church, not the other way around. Any text that was not 100 percent in keeping with Catholic teaching was rejected. It has been, since those early centuries, the accepted fact that Jesus spoke literally in John 6. Take the time to read this understanding of the Church in the early centuries. And it is obvious here they took him literally. They questioned Jesus, and Jesus is even more emphatic they are to actually eat (using a Greek word meaning to "chew" his flesh.) When Jesus described himself as a door, his audience did not say "How can this man be made out of wood?" But in John 6 they questioned him as he made it as clear as can be they were to eat His true flesh.

The priesthood in OT times starts with Melchexideck, who offered mere bread and wine.
The old was fulfilled in the new when instead of mere bread and wine, Jesus offered His body and blood, as the lamb of God, both sacrifice and priest. In John 6 Jesus encounters disbelievers, it is a hard saying, and has been a hard saying to accept since that time. I sympathize with you. Saint Ignatius of Antioch commented around 110 A.D. :
They [i.e. the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that THE EUCHARIST IS THE FLESH OF OUR SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. (Letter to Smyrnians 7:1)

Jesus in the Holy Eucharist is our New Covenant, our New Testament. In fact, it was when the Catholic Church was in the process of selecting the books of the Bible that the new books began to be referred to as "books of the New Testament."
Your post here does not answer any questions asked of you in the post you are quoting from and is non responsive to the scriptures shared with you and the questions asked of you. Please forgive me but I am not interested in the teachings of men outside of the scriptures. According to the scriptures, Jesus spoke in parables *Matthew 13:34-35 using symbols that have meaning. Just the same as Jesus is not literally a rock *1 Corinthians 10:4, lamb *John 1:29; 1 Peter 1:19, a shepherd *Matthew 26:31; John 10:11, a door *John 10:9, a river of water *John 4:14 or a loaf of bread *John 6:35. These are all symbols that Jesus used like eating His flesh (The Word became flesh *John 1:1-4; 14) means believing and following His Word and drinking His blood receiving everlasting life. If we do not believe and follow Gods' Word we do not have everlasting life *John 3:36. Now let's be honest. Where does it say anywhere in the bible that Jesus is literally a lamb *John 1:29; 36 1 Peter 1:19, a shepherd *Matthew 26:31; John 10:11, water *John 4:14 a door *John 10:9, a rock *1 Corinthians 10:4, or a loaf of bread *John 6:35? When Jesus says in Matthew 26:27-29 to take the cup of the vine representing His blood at the last supper where does it say in these scripture that this was literally the blood of Christ? - Yep no where. So many unanswered questions Valletta? Well as posted earlier, perhaps you can pray about it as the scriptures shared with you here do not agree with you and they are Gods Words not my words. God gave us the bible not the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Church did not write anything in the bible. We are better off believing Gods' Word than the teachings and traditions of men that lead us away from what Gods Word says. This is why the scriptures are the only rule of what faith *Romans 14:23; Hebrews 11:6 because our faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Words of God *Romans 10:17. Therefore we should believe the writings of Paul and Peter when they say only God's Words are true and we should believe and follow them *Romans 3:4; Acts of the Apostles 5:29. They both of course agreeing with Jesus who says that if we follow man-made teachings and traditions that lead us away from God and His Word to break the commandments of God we are not worshiping God in Matthew 15:3-9.

All of the above are something to pray about I guess.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
8,240
3,032
Minnesota
✟212,877.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Your post here does not answer any questions asked of you in the post you are quoting from and is non responsive to the scriptures shared with you and the questions asked of you. Please forgive me but I am not interested in the teachings of men outside of the scriptures. According to the scriptures, Jesus spoke in parables *Matthew 13:34-35 using symbols that have meaning. Just the same as Jesus is not literally a rock *1 Corinthians 10:4, lamb *John 1:29; 1 Peter 1:19, a shepherd *Matthew 26:31; John 10:11, a door *John 10:9, a river of water *John 4:14 or a loaf of bread *John 6:35. These are all symbols that Jesus used like eating His flesh (The Word became flesh *John 1:1-4; 14) means believing and following His Word and drinking His blood receiving everlasting life. If we do not believe and follow Gods' Word we do not have everlasting life *John 3:36. Now let's be honest. Where does it say anywhere in the bible that Jesus is literally a lamb, a shepherd, water, a door, a rock or bread? When Jesus says in Matthew 26:27-29 to take the cup of the vine representing His blood at the last supper where does it say in these scripture that this was literally the blood of Christ? - Yep no where. So many unanswered question? Perhaps you can pray about it as the scriptures shared with you here do not agree with you and they are Gods Words not my words. God gave us the bible not the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Church did not write anything in the bible. We are better off believing Gods' Word than the teachings and traditions of men that lead us away from what Gods Word says. This is why the scriptures are the only rule of what faith *Romans 14:23; Hebrews 11:6 because our faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Words of God *Romans 10:17. Therefore we should believe the writings of Paul and Peter when they say only God's Words are true and we should believe and follow them *Romans 3:4; Acts of the Apostles 5:29. They both of course agreeing with Jesus who says that if we follow man-made teachings and traditions that lead us away from God and His Word to break the commandments of God we are not worshiping God in Matthew 15:3-9.

All of the above are something to pray about I guess.
Your teachings are outside of what Scripture says and are a flawed interpretation. The Catholic Church CHOSE the 73 books of the Bible in a centuries long process, certainly the Holy Spirit was at work through Christ's Church during that process. The Church had to decide what was God-breathed and what was not. I do understand it is your man-made tradition to not recognize the Eucharist and to believe it is impossible for God to allow us to eat His flesh in modern times. You don't have to believe me, I again urge you to read the writings of the early Christians, I quoted from Ignatius. The old prefigures the new, the spotless lamb as a sacrifice to be eaten.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.