“Between 6,000 and 10,000 churches in the U.S. are dying each year”

[martybegan]

But you are saying to ban them based on their beliefs. You want qualifications to include a religious test.

Stop trying to wiggle out of this, you got caught lying. Own it.

You stop lying. I said a basic test for sanity.

Why do you keep saying its a religious test?

Are you admitting that religious beliefs are insane?

Because you say certain religious beliefs are "insane".

An arbitrary concept if there ever was one.

Just because you are trying to be slick doesn't mean everyone else notices what you are trying to say.

You lied. admit it.

you and ding just broadcast your insanity.

I rest my case.

You got caught lying, and you can't admit it.

Run away little troll, run away.

You think that I was caught lying about a religious test even though I am calling for a test of sanity.

All the while you don't have even the slightest inkling that you have been caught lying in the name of God.

Now who is going to believe that you are even capable of being truthful about any less important issue?

Not to worry!

You can always run for president!

You are targeting people of certain religions with your test, and masking your true intent.

Stop trying to dodge the issue and fess up.

 

[hobelim]

Um, how about not lying in a single thread?

“Between 6,000 and 10,000 churches in the U.S. are dying each year”

Blacklisting people based on the beliefs is not the same thing as banning people from positions for which they are not qualified to hold.

But you are saying to ban them based on their beliefs. You want qualifications to include a religious test.

Stop trying to wiggle out of this, you got caught lying. Own it.

You stop lying. I said a basic test for sanity.

Why do you keep saying its a religious test?

Are you admitting that religious beliefs are insane?

Because you say certain religious beliefs are "insane".

An arbitrary concept if there ever was one.

Just because you are trying to be slick doesn't mean everyone else notices what you are trying to say.

You lied. admit it.

I'm pretty sure he limits his hatred to Christianity. I have never seen him attack any other religion.

I guess you missed my commentaries on kosher law, circumcision, or phylacteries.

Funny thing is, I never once heard a single Jew accuse me of being antisemitic or hating Judaism.

Why do you think that is? They are smarter than that. If they ever had lost the keys to the kingdom from time to time, I assure you, they will never lose them again.

they see what they had never been told, and things unheard before fill their thoughts...

Meanwhile, back in the dungeon, you are almost certain that something is going on.... six feet above your head...

 

[BS Filter]

Is this good or bad?


Today, nearly four in ten (39%) young adults (ages 18-29) are religiously unaffiliated—three times the unaffiliated rate (13%) among seniors (ages 65 and older). While previous generations were also more likely to be religiously unaffiliated in their twenties, young adults today are nearly four times as likely as young adults a generation ago to identify as religiously unaffiliated. In 1986, for example, only 10% of young adults claimed no religious affiliation.


And it’s even worse in Europe where many empty churches are being converted to Muslim mosques.


At one time, churches provided a loci of social belonging as much as a religious base. Now, as many young people are losing the agenda of close, personal, face-to-face relatonships, such social gatherings no longer meet their personal goals.


What do you think?


More of this @ "Between 6,000 and 10,000 churches in the U.S. are dying each year" - and that means that over 100 will die this week

The "Church" is transitioning. Non-denominational churches are springing up all over.

 

[jehanne1431]

However, I do believe that faith in God is what has kept me alive, when things were really bad for me.

Fair enough but don’t make the mistake of suggesting everyone needs the support of such a belief system or the promise of immortality for being a good Christian. (whatever that is)

You: "Fair enough but don’t make the mistake of suggesting everyone needs the support of such a belief system or the promise of immortality for being a good Christian..." <<<< in order to do what? That you did not make clear?

Also, I see you quoted me (above) but where did I use those words?

 

[hobelim]

Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

But when the disciples who remained questioned him about that nutty remark he replied "The spirit alone gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are both spirit and life."

And when Jesus asked Simon Peter if the rest were going to leave him too he replied, " Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are words of eternal life. We have faith and know that you are the Holy One of God."

This shows that bread from heaven is symbolic for teaching from God, the word became flesh shows that the preexisting metaphor for teaching from God, bread from heaven, became a new metaphor for teaching from God, the flesh of Jesus, the Body of Christ.

To eat his flesh is to accept the teaching that Jesus received from God himself like manna from heaven about the figurative nature and hidden subjects in the divine commands. To drink his blood is to act on it.

Unless you accept his teaching and conform to the law in that light, eat his flesh and drink his blood, you cannot enter the sanctuary of God or have the eternal life promised for compliance with the law in you.

Life is in the blood, in the doing.

 

[jehanne1431]

Guys used to be really proud of their mullet hair cuts too. People move on, and tend to drop those things that serve no purpose in their lives.

The only problem is many or most "people" these days have no clue what serves a purpose in their lives and what does not.

And you know what serves a purpose in other people's lives better than they do? That's a right wing philosophy if I ever heard one.

I doubt you are a big fan of God’s, but He did bestow humanity with innate understanding of right and wrong, of natural law. Wikipedia, no fan of Christian thought, describes natural law as follows: >> Natural law is a philosophy asserting that certain rights are inherent by virtue of human nature, endowed by nature—traditionally by God or a transcendent source—and that these can be understood universally through human reason. As determined by nature, the law of nature is implied to be objective and universal; it exists independently of human understanding, and of the positive law of a given state.. Historically, natural law refers to the use of reason to analyze human nature to deduce binding rules of moral behavior from nature's or God's creation of reality and mankind. <<

Modern society has cast aside some natural laws as having no rightful demand on them. I see much of society once more single-minded to the basic needs for self preservation, family and neighbor --- now more driven by ego, narcissism and temporal pleasures. I also see a change in the last 30 years to the rejection of conventional morality or the need for any God. As a result society has become far more immersed in materialism, lust, power, vanity, rudeness, meanness towards those who disagree with them, cavalier rejection of historical beliefs and acts of valor. Instead they judge all of history (esp. America) in terms their 21st century “ethics” (or is it political correctness?) Because they can find flaws in historical thought or acts and find ample sins amongst Christians of today (as well as conservatives) they feel completely justified to throw out the entire philosophy or religion and rely on their own wits and feelings. They are also very selective in how they judge and who they judge, making their whole ideology a hypocritical farce, more often than not.

ps— wish I could have (but could not) shortened this pontificating answer. (apologies)

So what is your solution to what you see as a problem?

>>> So what is your solution to what you see as a problem?

If you are asking what is my solution to getting 50% of teens and young adults to refocus their lives on things that truly matter, I do not think there is a such a solution in human terms. This secular attitude is too wide spread and ingrained in our culture at this point. So I imagine we work with individuals and try to impress upon them greater truths. First and foremost, one has to acknowledge God exists and which God. If one cannot accept empirical evidence and reason to convince them of that then I see a driven purpose (in that particular individual) of not wanting to believe and consequently that primary objective becomes much harder to accomplish. The only way one comes to accept God is to first have the desire to want to know the truth. Otherwise, you can see for yourself all the flimsy counter explanations to dismiss miracles being offered up, as well as fanciful excuses why God cannot possibly be.

That is only step one, but almost mandatory for real success. “Openness to truth demands an openness to conversion” -- John Cardinal Henry Newman

 

[BULLDOG]

Guys used to be really proud of their mullet hair cuts too. People move on, and tend to drop those things that serve no purpose in their lives.

The only problem is many or most "people" these days have no clue what serves a purpose in their lives and what does not.

And you know what serves a purpose in other people's lives better than they do? That's a right wing philosophy if I ever heard one.

I doubt you are a big fan of God’s, but He did bestow humanity with innate understanding of right and wrong, of natural law. Wikipedia, no fan of Christian thought, describes natural law as follows: >> Natural law is a philosophy asserting that certain rights are inherent by virtue of human nature, endowed by nature—traditionally by God or a transcendent source—and that these can be understood universally through human reason. As determined by nature, the law of nature is implied to be objective and universal; it exists independently of human understanding, and of the positive law of a given state.. Historically, natural law refers to the use of reason to analyze human nature to deduce binding rules of moral behavior from nature's or God's creation of reality and mankind. <<

Modern society has cast aside some natural laws as having no rightful demand on them. I see much of society once more single-minded to the basic needs for self preservation, family and neighbor --- now more driven by ego, narcissism and temporal pleasures. I also see a change in the last 30 years to the rejection of conventional morality or the need for any God. As a result society has become far more immersed in materialism, lust, power, vanity, rudeness, meanness towards those who disagree with them, cavalier rejection of historical beliefs and acts of valor. Instead they judge all of history (esp. America) in terms their 21st century “ethics” (or is it political correctness?) Because they can find flaws in historical thought or acts and find ample sins amongst Christians of today (as well as conservatives) they feel completely justified to throw out the entire philosophy or religion and rely on their own wits and feelings. They are also very selective in how they judge and who they judge, making their whole ideology a hypocritical farce, more often than not.

ps— wish I could have (but could not) shortened this pontificating answer. (apologies)

So what is your solution to what you see as a problem?

>>> So what is your solution to what you see as a problem?

If you are asking what is my solution to getting 50% of teens and young adults to refocus their lives on things that truly matter, I do not think there is a such a solution in human terms. This secular attitude is too wide spread and ingrained in our culture at this point. So I imagine we work with individuals and try to impress upon them greater truths. First and foremost, one has to acknowledge God exists and which God. If one cannot accept empirical evidence and reason to convince them of that then I see a driven purpose (in that particular individual) of not wanting to believe and consequently that primary objective becomes much harder to accomplish. The only way one comes to accept God is to first have the desire to want to know the truth. Otherwise, you can see for yourself all the flimsy counter explanations to dismiss miracles being offered up, as well as fanciful excuses why God cannot possibly be.

That is only step one, but almost mandatory for real success. “Openness to truth demands an openness to conversion” -- John Cardinal Henry Newman

I would love to see your empirical evidence that a god exists, and especially that there is one true god.

 

[sparky]

 

[ding]

Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

But when the disciples who remained questioned him about that nutty remark he replied "The spirit alone gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are both spirit and life."

And when Jesus asked Simon Peter if the rest were going to leave him too he replied, " Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are words of eternal life. We have faith and know that you are the Holy One of God."

This shows that bread from heaven is symbolic for teaching from God, the word became flesh shows that the preexisting metaphor for teaching from God, bread from heaven, became a new metaphor for teaching from God, the flesh of Jesus, the Body of Christ.

To eat his flesh is to accept the teaching that Jesus received from God himself like manna from heaven about the figurative nature and hidden subjects in the divine commands. To drink his blood is to act on it.

Unless you accept his teaching and conform to the law in that light, eat his flesh and drink his blood, you cannot enter the sanctuary of God or have the eternal life promised for compliance with the law in you.

Life is in the blood, in the doing.

An Early Christian Eucharist


Justin Martyr (100-165): Christian philosopher and apologist

First Apology(155 A.D), chapter 66

And this food is called among us the Eucharist of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

 

[sparky]

Religmo's just looooOOOve quoting the bible , totally unaware the immense chasm betwixt religion and faith is fueled by it, or even exists

~S~

 

[hobelim]

Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

But when the disciples who remained questioned him about that nutty remark he replied "The spirit alone gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are both spirit and life."

And when Jesus asked Simon Peter if the rest were going to leave him too he replied, " Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are words of eternal life. We have faith and know that you are the Holy One of God."

This shows that bread from heaven is symbolic for teaching from God, the word became flesh shows that the preexisting metaphor for teaching from God, bread from heaven, became a new metaphor for teaching from God, the flesh of Jesus, the Body of Christ.

To eat his flesh is to accept the teaching that Jesus received from God himself like manna from heaven about the figurative nature and hidden subjects in the divine commands. To drink his blood is to act on it.

Unless you accept his teaching and conform to the law in that light, eat his flesh and drink his blood, you cannot enter the sanctuary of God or have the eternal life promised for compliance with the law in you.

Life is in the blood, in the doing.

An Early Christian Eucharist


Justin Martyr (100-165): Christian philosopher and apologist

First Apology(155 A.D), chapter 66

And this food is called among us the Eucharist of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

"How can you fail to see that I was not speaking about bread?" (Jesus H. Christ)

Then the disciples understood that he was speaking about the teaching of the pharisees, not bakers bread. Matthew 16:12

 

[sealybobo]

Guys used to be really proud of their mullet hair cuts too. People move on, and tend to drop those things that serve no purpose in their lives.

So many theists tell me that it isn’t possible that religion would last this long if it didn’t serve a valuable purpose but that only proves they don’t get how long evolution takes. No one will notice it in their lifetime. They won’t even notice it in their great grandchildren’s lifetimes if they could live that long. It takes hundreds of generations.

But today we see church numbers declining every generation. That’s like fast forward as far as evolution goes.

Religion served a purpose. Still does but a much smaller purpose today. And every generation gets smaller. If it weren’t for parents brainwashing it’d already be gone

 

[ding]

Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

But when the disciples who remained questioned him about that nutty remark he replied "The spirit alone gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are both spirit and life."

And when Jesus asked Simon Peter if the rest were going to leave him too he replied, " Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are words of eternal life. We have faith and know that you are the Holy One of God."

This shows that bread from heaven is symbolic for teaching from God, the word became flesh shows that the preexisting metaphor for teaching from God, bread from heaven, became a new metaphor for teaching from God, the flesh of Jesus, the Body of Christ.

To eat his flesh is to accept the teaching that Jesus received from God himself like manna from heaven about the figurative nature and hidden subjects in the divine commands. To drink his blood is to act on it.

Unless you accept his teaching and conform to the law in that light, eat his flesh and drink his blood, you cannot enter the sanctuary of God or have the eternal life promised for compliance with the law in you.

Life is in the blood, in the doing.

An Early Christian Eucharist


Justin Martyr (100-165): Christian philosopher and apologist

First Apology(155 A.D), chapter 66

And this food is called among us the Eucharist of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

"How can you fail to see that I was not speaking about bread?" (Jesus H. Christ)

Then the disciples understood that he was speaking about the teaching of the pharisees, not bakers bread. Matthew 16:12

Yes, Matthew 16 is a warning about the teaching of pharisees.

No, it has absolutely nothing to do with the body and blood of Christ.

 

[ding]

Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

But when the disciples who remained questioned him about that nutty remark he replied "The spirit alone gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are both spirit and life."

And when Jesus asked Simon Peter if the rest were going to leave him too he replied, " Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are words of eternal life. We have faith and know that you are the Holy One of God."

This shows that bread from heaven is symbolic for teaching from God, the word became flesh shows that the preexisting metaphor for teaching from God, bread from heaven, became a new metaphor for teaching from God, the flesh of Jesus, the Body of Christ.

To eat his flesh is to accept the teaching that Jesus received from God himself like manna from heaven about the figurative nature and hidden subjects in the divine commands. To drink his blood is to act on it.

Unless you accept his teaching and conform to the law in that light, eat his flesh and drink his blood, you cannot enter the sanctuary of God or have the eternal life promised for compliance with the law in you.

Life is in the blood, in the doing.

An Early Christian Eucharist


Justin Martyr (100-165): Christian philosopher and apologist

First Apology(155 A.D), chapter 66

And this food is called among us the Eucharist of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

"How can you fail to see that I was not speaking about bread?" (Jesus H. Christ)

Then the disciples understood that he was speaking about the teaching of the pharisees, not bakers bread. Matthew 16:12

1 Cor. 10:16–17, 11:23–29 and John 6:32–71 are about the body and blood of Christ Jesus.

Matthew 16:12 is a warning about the teaching of the pharisees.

Totally unrelated to the subject we are discussing.

 

[ding]

Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

But when the disciples who remained questioned him about that nutty remark he replied "The spirit alone gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are both spirit and life."

And when Jesus asked Simon Peter if the rest were going to leave him too he replied, " Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are words of eternal life. We have faith and know that you are the Holy One of God."

This shows that bread from heaven is symbolic for teaching from God, the word became flesh shows that the preexisting metaphor for teaching from God, bread from heaven, became a new metaphor for teaching from God, the flesh of Jesus, the Body of Christ.

To eat his flesh is to accept the teaching that Jesus received from God himself like manna from heaven about the figurative nature and hidden subjects in the divine commands. To drink his blood is to act on it.

Unless you accept his teaching and conform to the law in that light, eat his flesh and drink his blood, you cannot enter the sanctuary of God or have the eternal life promised for compliance with the law in you.

Life is in the blood, in the doing.

An Early Christian Eucharist


Justin Martyr (100-165): Christian philosopher and apologist

First Apology(155 A.D), chapter 66

And this food is called among us the Eucharist of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

"How can you fail to see that I was not speaking about bread?" (Jesus H. Christ)

Then the disciples understood that he was speaking about the teaching of the pharisees, not bakers bread. Matthew 16:12

Ignatius of Antioch
"I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire His blood, which is love incorruptible." St. Ignatius of Antioch, "Epistle to the Romans," c. 105 A.D.

 

[ding]

Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

But when the disciples who remained questioned him about that nutty remark he replied "The spirit alone gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are both spirit and life."

And when Jesus asked Simon Peter if the rest were going to leave him too he replied, " Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are words of eternal life. We have faith and know that you are the Holy One of God."

This shows that bread from heaven is symbolic for teaching from God, the word became flesh shows that the preexisting metaphor for teaching from God, bread from heaven, became a new metaphor for teaching from God, the flesh of Jesus, the Body of Christ.

To eat his flesh is to accept the teaching that Jesus received from God himself like manna from heaven about the figurative nature and hidden subjects in the divine commands. To drink his blood is to act on it.

Unless you accept his teaching and conform to the law in that light, eat his flesh and drink his blood, you cannot enter the sanctuary of God or have the eternal life promised for compliance with the law in you.

Life is in the blood, in the doing.

An Early Christian Eucharist


Justin Martyr (100-165): Christian philosopher and apologist

First Apology(155 A.D), chapter 66

And this food is called among us the Eucharist of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

"How can you fail to see that I was not speaking about bread?" (Jesus H. Christ)

Then the disciples understood that he was speaking about the teaching of the pharisees, not bakers bread. Matthew 16:12

"Heretics abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ." St. Ignatius of Antioch, "Epistle to the Smyrneans," c. 105 A.D.

 

[ding]

Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

But when the disciples who remained questioned him about that nutty remark he replied "The spirit alone gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are both spirit and life."

And when Jesus asked Simon Peter if the rest were going to leave him too he replied, " Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are words of eternal life. We have faith and know that you are the Holy One of God."

This shows that bread from heaven is symbolic for teaching from God, the word became flesh shows that the preexisting metaphor for teaching from God, bread from heaven, became a new metaphor for teaching from God, the flesh of Jesus, the Body of Christ.

To eat his flesh is to accept the teaching that Jesus received from God himself like manna from heaven about the figurative nature and hidden subjects in the divine commands. To drink his blood is to act on it.

Unless you accept his teaching and conform to the law in that light, eat his flesh and drink his blood, you cannot enter the sanctuary of God or have the eternal life promised for compliance with the law in you.

Life is in the blood, in the doing.

An Early Christian Eucharist


Justin Martyr (100-165): Christian philosopher and apologist

First Apology(155 A.D), chapter 66

And this food is called among us the Eucharist of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

"How can you fail to see that I was not speaking about bread?" (Jesus H. Christ)

Then the disciples understood that he was speaking about the teaching of the pharisees, not bakers bread. Matthew 16:12

"Not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the Flesh and Blood of that incarnated Jesus." St. Justin Martyr, "First Apology," c. 150 A.D.

 

[ding]

Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

But when the disciples who remained questioned him about that nutty remark he replied "The spirit alone gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are both spirit and life."

And when Jesus asked Simon Peter if the rest were going to leave him too he replied, " Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are words of eternal life. We have faith and know that you are the Holy One of God."

This shows that bread from heaven is symbolic for teaching from God, the word became flesh shows that the preexisting metaphor for teaching from God, bread from heaven, became a new metaphor for teaching from God, the flesh of Jesus, the Body of Christ.

To eat his flesh is to accept the teaching that Jesus received from God himself like manna from heaven about the figurative nature and hidden subjects in the divine commands. To drink his blood is to act on it.

Unless you accept his teaching and conform to the law in that light, eat his flesh and drink his blood, you cannot enter the sanctuary of God or have the eternal life promised for compliance with the law in you.

Life is in the blood, in the doing.

An Early Christian Eucharist


Justin Martyr (100-165): Christian philosopher and apologist

First Apology(155 A.D), chapter 66

And this food is called among us the Eucharist of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

"How can you fail to see that I was not speaking about bread?" (Jesus H. Christ)

Then the disciples understood that he was speaking about the teaching of the pharisees, not bakers bread. Matthew 16:12

"If the Lord were from other than the Father (and thus capable of performing miracles), how could He rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be His Body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is His Blood? When, therefore, the mixed cup (wine and water) and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the Body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is nourished by the Body and Blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of Him?" St. Irenaeus, "Against Heresies," 189 A.D.

 

[anynameyouwish]

If churches stayed out of politics they might find their membership recovering. There are more than a few million who find evangelical support for Trump disturbing and hypocritical. Who the hell wants to go to church ans see a sign that voting for a democrat is sinful or supporting Trump is the "Christian" thing to do.

The "social justice" churches are all politics and no Christ, and make no mistake. My evangelical church has never mentioned Trump, not once.

I have heard some people say they left a particular church because of all the fire and brimstone. Too much hate.

 

[Karl Rand]

If churches stayed out of politics they might find their membership recovering. There are more than a few million who find evangelical support for Trump disturbing and hypocritical. Who the hell wants to go to church ans see a sign that voting for a democrat is sinful or supporting Trump is the "Christian" thing to do.

The "social justice" churches are all politics and no Christ, and make no mistake. My evangelical church has never mentioned Trump, not once.

I have heard some people say they left a particular church because of all the fire and brimstone. Too much hate.

I’ve more frequently had people tell me they left the church because of their priests/ministers/nuns etc sexually abusing children. What I find difficult to understand are those who themselves were abused yet still remain in the church. But then again various weird forms of biblical aplogetics operate in believers heads. Some decades ago when discussing the bad Popes ( there have been more than a few) with an academic theologian of the Roman kind he informed me ‘The church still stands because only a divine institution could survive the machinations of Satan’ Anyone capable of such twisted logic in never going to listen to rational argument so why bother?