tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post561476517539617737..comments2023-08-15T06:05:11.726-05:00Comments on John Calvin: Calvinism My Way: Is Transubstantiation Cannibalism?John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comBlogger31125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-12520504637382821912015-06-27T09:48:51.071-05:002015-06-27T09:48:51.071-05:00It's not a whiff. Jesus is God. God doesn...It's not a whiff. Jesus is God. God doesn't whiff. But sometimes we are dumb as rocks. <br /><br />As for why the debate, in the early centuries there wasn't one, not about this. The Passover was already a symbolic meal of remembrance, and Jesus simply explained its deeper prophetic sense, that it was about Him. <br /><br />What the walk-away disciples had trouble with in John 6springfieldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-83181050787098846372013-12-06T10:57:19.930-06:002013-12-06T10:57:19.930-06:00There are some things that we shouldn't be req...There are some things that we shouldn't be required to take on faith. If God asks me to do something that can be reasonably interpreted by outsiders as an act of cannibalism, then He'd better have a darned good explanation, in very explicit terms, as to why it's necessary. Those disciples were right to walk away. <br /><br />If Jesus phrased it another way, like, "When you eat Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-728064796090534722013-08-22T15:50:37.676-05:002013-08-22T15:50:37.676-05:00Transubstantiation is what drove me from the Catho...Transubstantiation is what drove me from the Catholic Church. (Among other things: The Inquisition, silent consent of the slave trade, silence during the holocaust) but transubstantiation is what finally did it for me. Your teaching here does absolutely nothing to clear this up. I'm afraid that Christianity itself is to blame; I have to reject everything that is taught based on my Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14194748976613100293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-73950359353582260952013-03-20T13:56:07.378-05:002013-03-20T13:56:07.378-05:00In John 6, Jesus is not talking about the ...In John 6, Jesus is not talking about the eucharist. He said, "The bread of God is he who came down from heaven and gives his life for the world. I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be Dan923https://www.blogger.com/profile/17664133345286768043noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-37386807441959021112011-08-21T21:47:23.276-05:002011-08-21T21:47:23.276-05:00@TSVDP: It can't be charged of all of us, beca...@TSVDP: It can't be charged of all of us, because all of us don't claim that it is literally the blood and body of Christ.John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-13461157365025714082011-08-21T21:14:27.777-05:002011-08-21T21:14:27.777-05:00John:
IF these disciples walk away, I hear becaus...John:<br /><br />IF these disciples walk away, I hear because when Jesus says something like "Drink my blood", this is against the Kosher Leviticus Law, as a Jew, you simply are not suppose to violate this code. A bit like "healing" someone on the Sabbath, something that on a superficial level, perhaps you are not suppose to do, if you violate one law, you violate them all. TSVDPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08799437719101782398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-30563846820360980162010-12-13T11:59:52.418-06:002010-12-13T11:59:52.418-06:00More on this. It hit me today how much stock the ...More on this. It hit me today how much stock the RC position puts on the Lord not telling this group of disciples that He was speaking symbolically. It's as if He should be expected to "chase" folks down if they reject any saying of His, much less a "hard saying". But, I noticed this while re-reading this passage again:<br /><br />64 “But there are some of you who do Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-3043064812955796512010-11-30T09:56:24.361-06:002010-11-30T09:56:24.361-06:00I posed this question to the RC I am discussing th...I posed this question to the RC I am discussing the issue with here in Shreveport. His response was: <br /><br />"The problem that you have in your reasoning is that Jesus makes a statement here in v. 40 once...never stressing its emphasis." <br /><br />His answer was that Jesus only mentioned "see the Son" once, so somehow that means it is not to be taken literally. I toldJohnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-32130348368913878362010-11-27T12:10:49.130-06:002010-11-27T12:10:49.130-06:00Good PointGood PointJohn Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-49945705605966965632010-11-27T12:08:02.136-06:002010-11-27T12:08:02.136-06:00I have read over the passage from John 6 many time...I have read over the passage from John 6 many times in the past couple of months. The other night I noticed this:<br /><br />John 6:40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who **sees** the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”<br /><br />If we are going to stick to a strictly literal translation of the John 6 passage (as Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-59915792812628745692010-11-04T07:55:58.197-05:002010-11-04T07:55:58.197-05:00Thank you, Bro. Carroll. I hope to hear from one ...Thank you, Bro. Carroll. I hope to hear from one or both of the others who commented on this topic. I am not 100% sold on the idea I put forth, so I'd like input. It seems strong, but I am leary about buying into something just because it "sounds good". Do you have any detailed thoughts about it?<br /><br />JohnJohn Sackernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-38590754475323629402010-11-01T18:50:46.765-05:002010-11-01T18:50:46.765-05:00@ J Sacker: Thank you very much for your input. ...@ J Sacker: Thank you very much for your input. Feel. free to be involved as much as you like.John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-45866026159429055382010-11-01T05:01:05.490-05:002010-11-01T05:01:05.490-05:00Bro. Carroll:
No, you don't know me unless yo...Bro. Carroll:<br /><br />No, you don't know me unless you remember me from the old AFF. I think we were on that forum together for a time. I'm not sure how I found your blog, but it may have had something to do with a Google search. I'm not sure what topic I was searching. It was probably Oneness. Or, it may have been from a link on someone else's blog.<br /><br />JohnJohn Sackernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-5155101467124525662010-10-31T16:34:00.083-05:002010-10-31T16:34:00.083-05:00@ John Sacker: Good thoughts. I think you are ri...@ John Sacker: Good thoughts. I think you are right. Thank you for participating. Please stay involved.<br /><br />Do I know you and how did you find out about my blog?John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-79995463193961245232010-10-31T11:28:34.859-05:002010-10-31T11:28:34.859-05:00Gentlemen:
I hope not to be offensive in insertin...Gentlemen:<br /><br />I hope not to be offensive in inserting a comment. I am currently having this discussion with a man in my hometown (Shreveport, La) who is Roman Catholic. He puts forth the same arguments as above. Just last evening I asked him about the following thought that came to me. The thought is based on his position (which he equates to the "early fathers' and, John Sacker; Shreveport, La.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-81076497767214991812010-10-26T14:36:14.330-05:002010-10-26T14:36:14.330-05:00@ DJH:
1. Using those kinds of explanations one c...@ DJH:<br /><br />1. Using those kinds of explanations one can prove any thing he wants. You answer is a smoke screen designed to defend a position at all cost. <br /><br />Christ blood was NOT literally shed, there for it could not have literally been his blood. It represented the blood that would be shed.<br /><br />Besides, it is said, "For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-47788593965945610952010-10-26T00:06:02.444-05:002010-10-26T00:06:02.444-05:00John,
Answering your questions in order:
1. Tim...John,<br /><br />Answering your questions in order:<br /><br />1. Time is a construct created by God as He is eternal. Since Jesus is God, He operates outside of time as we know it, so for Jesus, every moment in all of eternity is simply "now". Hence, for Jesus, He can easily say that this is His blood, even though in our concept of time it hasn't happened yet. Again, it is DJHerculesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-76843304253887414542010-10-21T20:05:47.196-05:002010-10-21T20:05:47.196-05:00@ DJH: Honestly, to the non-biased reader, all of ...@ DJH: Honestly, to the non-biased reader, all of the explanations given by Catholics trying to defend transubstantiation is nothing more than illogical, theological double-talk. It makes no sense. <br /><br />In what meaningful sense is it LITERALLY the flesh and blood of Christ when it has none of the LITERAL substance: It does not look like LITERAL flesh/blood. It does not taste like John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-78365646657455205672010-10-21T19:26:45.852-05:002010-10-21T19:26:45.852-05:00@ Hercules: Couple Questions.
1. How can "t...@ Hercules: Couple Questions.<br /><br />1. How can "this IS my blood" be literal when Jesus had not even shed his blood yet (Matthew 26:28)?<br /><br />2. What other miracle of transubstantiation did Jesus perform that the "change of substance" was not evident? i.e. the transubstantiation of water into wine.John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-50179268724842319662010-10-18T23:40:32.348-05:002010-10-18T23:40:32.348-05:00I will respond more specifically soon.I will respond more specifically soon.John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-81947334190589063752010-10-18T23:29:40.947-05:002010-10-18T23:29:40.947-05:00John,
I hope you will get more specific regarding...John,<br /><br />I hope you will get more specific regarding my comments. I understand that you don't believe in the Eucharist as we understand it, but I have to say that there is nothing "illogical" about the Church's understanding of this doctrine. In fact, it is perfectly logical. It does require faith, but so does a doctrine such as the resurrection, which by the world&#DJHerculesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-51796441871691748492010-10-15T00:27:57.967-05:002010-10-15T00:27:57.967-05:00@Hercules: I have a couple questions for you spec...@Hercules: I have a couple questions for you specifically as I respect you as a person as well as respecting your knowledge and zeal of the Catholic faith.John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-29185018509629267512010-10-15T00:26:32.912-05:002010-10-15T00:26:32.912-05:00@ Hercules: I will read this in more detail later...@ Hercules: I will read this in more detail later. Thank you for posting! Please stay involved. But...<br /><br />"Now that we have a proper understanding of what the Eucharist is, we can see why it is not cannibalism. Cannibalism would entail the consumption of flesh under its "accidents" in a way that would require our bodies to metabolize it as flesh, which of course, doesn&John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-33147171340527993742010-10-14T23:35:08.356-05:002010-10-14T23:35:08.356-05:00I second Leslie K.'s comments, kudos!
John, F...I second Leslie K.'s comments, kudos!<br /><br />John, For 20 centuries the Church has struggled to understand in human terms what is a supernatural reality, that is, the fact that the Eucharist still looks, tastes and metabolizes in our bodies like bread and wine, but according to the clear words of John in chapter 6 of his Gospel, is in reality Christ's flesh and blood. That the ChurchDJHerculesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2132076222463955632.post-7594443246154891112010-10-02T12:38:38.928-05:002010-10-02T12:38:38.928-05:00The transubstantiation of the water into wine is i...The transubstantiation of the water into wine is is and example of true transubstantiation. What is SUPPOSE to happen in the Eucharist is not. If it is, then it is cannibalism.John Calvin: Calvinism My Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08890856408101885702noreply@blogger.com