What if Jesus comes tomorrow and it turns out these scriptures mean exactly as they read?

[Root of Jesse]

The bitter herbs are literally slavery?
Just like bread is literally flesh?
Um, ok?

Is there a question there??? No but the blood of the lamb and eating the lamb, the unleavened bread are all part of the remembrance. Remember, at Passover, if you didn't paint the blood on the horizontal and verticle door beams, AND EAT THE LAMB, your firstborn would be killed.
Jesus is the lamb, and the passover we celebrate is Jesus, the lamb killed and eaten.

 

[Root of Jesse]

So I'm obligated to celebrate passover? Not according to Paul.

You do, whether you realize it or not.

 

[concretecamper]

I understand enough to not understand how you can even say it's not symbolic. Everything in it is a symbol for something.

in other words, you are comfortable in your ignorance. Your choice.

 

[renniks]

in other words, you are comfortable in your ignorance. Your choice.

You certainly have not brought any enlightenment. Just claiming it's not symbolic with no proof.

 

[renniks]

Is there a question there??? No but the blood of the lamb and eating the lamb, the unleavened bread are all part of the remembrance. Remember, at Passover, if you didn't paint the blood on the horizontal and verticle door beams, AND EAT THE LAMB, your firstborn would be killed.
Jesus is the lamb, and the passover we celebrate is Jesus, the lamb killed and eaten.

Of course. None of which makes it literally flesh and blood.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Of course. None of which makes it literally flesh and blood.

Well, Jesus saying so does...or are you saying Jesus didn't mean what he said? If that's what you believe, why believe any of it? It all starts to fall apart, as has been shown since, when you try to minimize or change what Jesus' teaching was.

 

[renniks]

Well, Jesus saying so does...or are you saying Jesus didn't mean what he said? If that's what you believe, why believe any of it? It all starts to fall apart, as has been shown since, when you try to minimize or change what Jesus' teaching was.

Jesus used figurative language more often than not. He said he was the vine, but I never assumed his body grew leaves. He said he was the gate, but I never assumed his body had hinges... but if he says he is bread, I should assume his body is quite literally bread?

 

[Root of Jesse]

Jesus used figurative language more often than not. He said he was the vine, but I never assumed his body grew leaves. He said he was the gate, but I never assumed his body had hinges... but if he says he is bread, I should assume his body is quite literally bread?

Why do you believe a vine has to grow leaves? Or that a gate has to have hinges? You, my man, are thinking in human terms, and Jesus wasn't speaking in human terms. He didn't say his body was bread. He said bread is his body. Oh, I know you won't get it, but that's because of how you were taught.

I know Jesus spoke in parables to make points, and that's what the vine, the gate, etc. were. It is important to understand how to interpret Scripture in the light of what He was trying to convey. How do we know what he was trying to convey? Because his apostles and disciples had disciples whom they taught these very things to. For 1500 years, John 6 meant exactly what we believe it means. Only after the Reformation was it ever thought to mean different.

 

[renniks]

Why do you believe a vine has to grow leaves? Or that a gate has to have hinges? You, my man, are thinking in human terms, and Jesus wasn't speaking in human terms.

No, he was speaking of spiritual matters. Jesus is present in the eucharist for true believers. That doesn't make transubstantiation correct.

 

[Root of Jesse]

No, he was speaking of spiritual matters. Jesus is present in the eucharist for true believers. That doesn't make transubstantiation correct.

So you believe Jesus would tell us to do something, and then not show us how to do it?

 

[renniks]

So you believe Jesus would tell us to do something, and then not show us how to do it?

I don't know what you mean. He did show us how to do it.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I don't know what you mean. He did show us how to do it.

You're right, he did. We actually follow it.

 

[renniks]

You're right, he did. We actually follow it.

Not really. Do you have an actual meal like the early church did?

 

[Root of Jesse]

Not really. Do you have an actual meal like the early church did?

Yes, we do!

 

[renniks]

Yes, we do!

What church is that?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Another poster once asked: What if Jesus comes tomorrow and it turns out these scriptures mean exactly as they read?

I agree. What if John 6 means exactly what it says? What if Matthew 16:18-20 means exactly what it says, and makes Peter the head of the apostles, and thus the entire Church, and his successors the same?

This was written in February and Jesus didn’t come the next day. Likely he isn’t coming tomorrow either. The world hadn’t yet become a footstool for his feet.

 

[Root of Jesse]

What church is that?

Every Catholic Church.

 

[Root of Jesse]

This was written in February and Jesus didn’t come the next day. Likely he isn’t coming tomorrow either. The world hadn’t yet become a footstool for his feet.

News flash: Jesus is here, yesterday, today, tomorrow. And the World is his footstool.

 

[renniks]

Every Catholic Church.

So where's the part in scripture about having the Mass in Latin?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

News flash: Jesus is here, yesterday, today, tomorrow. And the World is his footstool.

News flash, when that happens He turns the world over to His Father. Since that hasn’t happened yet, neither has the other.