Where is the scripture that says it literally becomes the flesh and blood of Christ?
I'm a baptist-protestant type person... Isn't eating flesh kind of.... Well, bad?
i DoN't UnDeRsTaNd!!!!!
2007-10-23 13:47:07 · 21 answers · asked by CanadianFundamentalist 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Maya - I fail to see the point in your answer.
Please elaborate.
2007-10-23 13:56:38 · update #1
Genghis - if that is true, why doesn't it actually turn into human flesh and blood?
2007-10-23 14:01:25 · update #2
Whats wrong with the idea that its a metaphor?
When you use a metaphor, you do NOT say "He represents a tiger"/"He is represented by a tiger"
You say "He's a tiger!" to describe an overtly agressive person.
Just because I say "He's a tiger!" does not mean that he is literally a tiger; it means that a tiger would be his "symbol", that he shares attributes or some link with a tiger.
?
2007-10-23 14:05:27 · update #3
Pastor Billy says: there was no metaphor. The language of the bible text is not figurative as someone else would claim.
John 6 is extremely literal
give this a listen it is a debate on this topic between 2 former Baptists, one is now Catholic the other some sort of Protestant non-denominational
Tim Staples and Steve Greg
http://www.thenarrowpath.com/archive/TNP061221L.mp3Day 4, Dec. 21, 2006 Main topic is Eucharist
2007-10-25 13:46:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ye Old Canadian,
there are many cases of physical evidence where the bread and wine have turned into flesh and blood. Many of them and other miracles are in churches all over the world. Please keep you mind and heart open. God bless.
By the way, when transubstantiation occurs, what do you think would happen when everyone always saw blood and flesh? If there was absolute and constant proof that God exists and Jesus gave us this amazing gift? How many people do you think would be going up there to receive Him? How many would feel absolutely unworthy and scared to even go up there? Not many would go up there because they would be scared and ashamed. While we should all be sorry and ashamed of our sins, God wants to have a relationship with us. He wants us to love and respect Him, not be afraid of Him. That is why what is usually seen are accidents (only seeing the bread and wine). He doesn't want to scare, and He doesn't want to force you to believe. If He forced you to believe by showing absolute proof, then what is faith for? We would all be like dogs. It would be like taking away our free will to choose to believe.
Also, should Jesus have to constantly put on a show for unbelievers? Isn't that what faith is for?
2007-10-23 21:22:49 · answer #2 · answered by momo5j7 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Most Sola Scriptura Christians tell us we are wrong when we don't take the parts of the Bible literally that they want us to take literally. Then when we take a part of the Bible literally (along with almost 2,000 years of practice guided by the Holy Spirit) they again tell us we are wrong!
For the record:
At the Last Supper, Jesus said, “Take this bread. It is my body.” Then he said, “Take this and drink. This is my blood. Do this in memory of me.”
Catholics believe this was the First Eucharist, that through a miracle the bread and wine actually became the body and blood of Jesus Christ.
Catholics reenact the Last Supper during every Mass, where God, acting through the priest, changes the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ.
This is a great sacrament of thanksgiving and unity of Catholics.
By the way, the Orthodox, Lutheran and many Anglican Churches also believe in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.
For more information, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church, sections 1322 and following: http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt1art3.htm
With love in Christ.
2007-10-23 23:17:44 · answer #3 · answered by imacatholic2 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
First: If that were true, there would be nothing left of jesus (in human form), as there is a finite amount of flesh and blood.
Second: If Jesus is the son of god, then he is no longer flesh and blood (as he went up to heaven), how can you transubstantiate from someone who isn't flesh and blood in the first place? Or more poignantly, what need is there to transubstantiate?
It's symbolic. Just how Adam and Eve "became one flesh". I doubt that Adam and Eve were actually joined together like two ameobas or something. They were two physically distinct people - god was speaking symbolically. There is no need to 'eat' and 'drink' god. He's god, he can do anything. If he wants to save us, he will. If he doesn't, he will not. Being cannibalistic is not a requirement. It's symbolic. One word can have different meanings or shades of meaning, and even if there is another word that better describes what you mean LITERALLY, the 'spirit' of that word may not be the right one in the context.
Things not only get lost in translation, but even meaning can get lost over the years (prime example, saying "I'm bad" actually means I'm good, calling someone 'dog' is now a good thing, saying someone is a pimp is now good, calling something the 'apocrypha' is now bad, and the term 'deuterocanonical' is now the term preferred).
2007-10-23 21:11:38 · answer #4 · answered by James Bond 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
When we eat flesh in this world it is dead and it becomes a part of us but when we consume Jesus flesh and blood he is alive and we become part of him---think of it as plugging in to a power outlet.
James Bond---what about the multiplication of the loaves and fishes---he miraculously made it so it fed everybody and then they had enough left over for twelve baskets full.
2007-10-23 21:00:45 · answer #5 · answered by Midge 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
All of Catholic belief is full of ceremony and trappings. When they say that, it means that you respect the bread and wine and show reverence for it as you would for the body and blood of Christ (ie don't drop it on the floor or throw it away!). It doesn't actually become the body and blood. It is a representation of the body and blood. This ticks off the nuns to no end when you ask it in catechism class and is good for getting them off on a tangent that will take up a whole class so you don't have to do anything else!
2007-10-23 20:55:41 · answer #6 · answered by wyrdrose 4 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Eating actual human flesh and blood would be cannibalism. Therefore, Jews who were not exercising faith and who did not properly understand Jesus’ statement about eating his flesh and drinking his blood were shocked. This indicated the Jewish view on eating human flesh and blood, as inculcated by the Law.Unfortunately some Religious folk think otherwise.
2007-10-23 20:52:01 · answer #7 · answered by conundrum 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Read John 6.
Read the asker of this question and my answer:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Av4fezpRd9DmF0tn0KrPoKDsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071023172143AAQdqPQ&show=7#profile-info-ETcF7hzVaa
2007-10-23 20:51:00 · answer #8 · answered by Vernacular Catholic 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
"Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life..."
Since the laity does not drink the wine during the Mass, is it only the priest who receives eternal life?
2007-10-23 23:50:37 · answer #9 · answered by Renata 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I would have answered, but Fr K, as usual, made a STELLAR showing!
2007-10-23 20:55:19 · answer #10 · answered by SpiritRoaming 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋