Eat Me!

[Johan]

Eat Me!

That was exactly what Jesus said.


Joh 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

Joh 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

Joh 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

Joh 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.

Joh 6:32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

Joh 6:33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

Joh 6:34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.

Joh 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.


And:

Joh 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

Joh 6:52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

Joh 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

Joh 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

Joh 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.


Because in eating Him our soul will experience another Life. Jesus that lives from out of us.


Joh 6:57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.


By eating Him Jesus will be on earth again.


Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:


Because this eating has the power to do it. To manifest Jesus.


But human beings has a brain.


And this brain is unfortunately used to sin. To understand the Word of God.



But the Word cannot be understood. The Word was not sent for that purpose. The Word was sent to be Life unto us.


So we need to eat it and babies need to drink it.


1Pe 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:



And God’s gifts know what they are doing.


Eph 4:15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:


They speak the Truth in Love and God’s children grow.


This speaking does not origin in the brain. Nor is it understanding coming from interpretation .

This speaking is God creating. And man is studying the Word and interpretating it and understanding it. But man is not growing. Because growing in the Life has not been given to man’s understanding and man’s interpretation. And by this understanding man create his doctrines. And man has no life because of “his doctrines”.

Growing can only come from God.

1Co 3:7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

And this comes by revelation and not understanding.


1Co 2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
1Co 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
1Co 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.


All these things are a mystery


Mar 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
Mar 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.


So let us not be amazed when we see that some “think” they see.


Love Johan

 

[WIP]

Do you suppose that another word for "eat" might be "partake," which then could mean "join in" or "be a part of" or "have a relationship with" or ...

 

[Johan]

Do you suppose that another word for "eat" might be "partake," which then could mean "join in" or "be a part of" or "have a relationship with" or ...

I would not dare changing the Scripture to be understood by the "brain". I should remain the "mystery" that it is. That way the "worthy" can
allow God to do with the Word the Creation that He intended. So many are struggling to find the Life of Jesus. They have done away with the Creation Power of God in Jesus.

Jer 18:4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.
Jer 18:5 Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying,
Jer 18:6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.

 

[childeye]

When I read eat my flesh and drink my blood, I think of the death of the Christ on the cross, and the divine Love that is on display there.

 

[WIP]

When I read eat my flesh and drink my blood, I think of the death of the Christ on the cross, and the divine Love that is on display there.

This is sort of where I was going with my earlier post. Eat as in partaking or ingesting.

 

[Jim Parker]

Do you suppose that another word for "eat" might be "partake," which then could mean "join in" or "be a part of" or "have a relationship with" or ...

It is a direct reference to the Eucharist in which the bread is IN FACT the body of Christ and the wine is IN FACT the blood of Christ.
The writers of the primitive church confirm that understanding was what was taught by the apostles.

Ignatius of Antioch (30-107 A. D. A disciple of the apostle John and Bishop of Antioch) in his Epistle to the Smyrnaens, Ch. VII: “Let Us Stand Aloof from Such Heretics” states; “They (the heretics) abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins,..”

Ignatius was taught by the John, the beloved disciple of Christ and, in this statement, he affirms the teaching of the apostles and Christ that the bread is Christ’s body.

Justin Martyr, the church’s first apologist, wrote in the first half of the 2nd century in his “The First Apology of Justin”, in Chapter LXVI.—Of the Eucharist. In it he reports what he was taught as a new Christian by the church. That would mean that the teaching he received was already established in the church. It is part of the teaching of the apostles who taught what they learned from Jesus. It is God’s inspired teaching to the church by His Son, through the apostles to the church.

“And this food is called among us Eujcaristiva [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 Saviour, 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. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body; ”and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood; ”and gave it to them alone.”

Further early references:

IRENAEUS, Against Heresies (175-185 AD)
Book IV;

Chapter XVIII.—Concerning Sacrifices and Oblations, and Those Who Truly Offer Them.

4…………..But how can they be consistent with themselves, [when they say] that the bread over which thanks have been given is the body of their Lord, and the cup His blood, if they do not call Himself the Son of the Creator of the world, that is, His Word, through whom the wood fructifies, and the fountains gush forth, and the earth gives “first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear."

5. Then, again, how can they say that the flesh, which is nourished with the body of the Lord and with His blood, goes to corruption, and does not partake of life? Let them, therefore, either alter their opinion, or cease from offering the things just mentioned. But our opinion is in accordance with the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn establishes our opinion. For we offer to Him His own, announcing consistently the fellowship and union of the flesh and Spirit. For as the bread, which is produced from the earth, when it receives the invocation of God, is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly; so also our bodies, when they receive the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of the resurrection to eternity.

Chapter XXXIII.—Whosoever Confesses that One God is the Author of Both Testaments, and Diligently Reads the Scriptures in Company with the Presbyters of the Church, is a True Spiritual Disciple; And He Will Rightly Understand and Interpret All that the Prophets Have Declared Respecting Christ and the Liberty of the New Testament.

2. Moreover, he shall also examine the doctrine of Marcion, [inquiring] how he holds that there are two gods, separated from each other by an infinite distance. Or how can he be good who draws away men that do not belong to him from him who made them, and calls them into his own kingdom? And why is his goodness, which does not save all [thus], defective? Also, why does he, indeed, seem to be good as respects men, but most unjust with regard to him who made men, inasmuch as he deprives him of his possessions? Moreover, how could the Lord, with any justice, if He belonged to another father, have acknowledged the bread to be His body, while He took it from that creation to which we belong, and affirmed the mixed cup to be His blood? And why did He acknowledge Himself to be the Son of man, if He had not gone through that birth which belongs to a human being? How, too, could He forgive us those sins for which we are answerable to our Maker and God? And how, again, supposing that He was not flesh, but was a man merely in appearance, could He have been crucified, and could blood and water have issued from His pierced side? What body, moreover, was it that those who buried Him consigned to the tomb? And what was that which rose again from the dead?

BOOK V,

Chapter. II When Christ Visited Us in His Grace, He Did Not Come to What Did Not Belong to Him: Also, by Shedding His True Blood for Us, and Exhibiting to Us His True Flesh in the Eucharist, He Conferred Upon Our Flesh the Capacity of Salvation.

2 “He (Jesus) has acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as His own blood, from which He bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of the creation) He has established as His own body, from which He gives increase to our bodies.”

3. When, therefore, the mingled cup and the manufactured bread receives the Word of God, and the Eucharist of the blood and the body of Christ is made, from which things the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they affirm that the flesh is incapable of receiving the gift of God, which is life eternal, which [flesh] is nourished from the body and blood of the Lord, and is a member of Him?—even as the blessed Paul declares in his Epistle to the Ephesians, that “we are members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones.” He does not speak these words of some spiritual and invisible man, for a spirit has not bones nor flesh; but [he refers to] that dispensation [by which the Lord became] an actual man, consisting of flesh, and nerves, and bones,—that [flesh] which is nourished by the cup which is His blood, and receives increase from the bread which is His body.

Chapter XXXVII.

Those who have become acquainted with the secondary (i.e., under Christ) constitutions of’ the apostles, are aware that the Lord instituted a new oblation in the new covenant, according to [the declaration of] Malachi the prophet. For, “from the rising of the sun even to the setting my name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure sacrifice; ” as John also declares in the Apocalypse: “The incense is the prayers of the saints.” Then again, Paul exhorts us “to present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.” And again, “Let us offer the sacrifice of praise, that is, the fruit of the lips.” Now those oblations are not according to the law, the handwriting of which the Lord took away from the midst by cancelling it; but they are according to the Spirit, for we must worship God “in spirit and in truth.” And therefore the oblation of the Eucharist is not a carnal one, but a spiritual; and in this respect it is pure. For we make an oblation to God of the bread and the cup of blessing, giving Him thanks in that He has commanded the earth to bring forth these fruits for our nourishment. And then, when we have perfected the oblation, we invoke the Holy Spirit, that He may exhibit this sacrifice, both the bread the body of Christ, and the cup the blood of Christ, in order that the receivers of these antitypes may obtain remission of sins and life eternal.

Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 225 AD); On Prayer, Chapter XIX: Of Stations.

Similarly, too, touching the days of Stations, most think that they must not be present at the sacrificial prayers, on the ground that the Station must be dissolved by reception of the Lord’s Body. Does, then, the Eucharist cancel a service devoted to God, or bind it more to God? Will not your Station be more solemn if you have withal stood at God’s altar? When the Lord’s Body has been received and reserved each point is secured, both the participation of the sacrifice and the discharge of duty. If the “Station” has received its name from the example of military life—for we withal are God’s military —of course no gladness or sadness chanting to the camp abolishes the “stations” of the soldiers: for gladness will carry out discipline more willingly, sadness more carefully.

Do as you like with that information.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Except the writings of the ECF are not scripture. Perhaps it would be best to put that aside and look at what scripture says and what it does/could mean? (Not that we have not done this on more than one occasion......LOL)

 

[Papa Zoom]

Except the writings of the ECF are not scripture. Perhaps it would be best to put that aside and look at what scripture says and what it does/could mean? (Not that we have not done this on more than one occasion......LOL)

A very good point.

 

[childeye]

Let's not get lost in semantics here. Ignatius of Antioch's letter to the Smyrnaeans should be taken in context. When he speaks of those who abstain from Eucharist and prayer, he is talking about people who don't believe Jesus came in the flesh (shown below). Therefore they can gain no nourishment from Christ's death, whose suffering according to the Gospel, is watching God's Love.

Ignatius says: For what does any one profit me, if he commends me, but blasphemes my Lord, not confessing that He was[truly] possessed of a body? But he who does not acknowledge this, has in fact altogether denied Him, being enveloped in death. I have not, however, thought good to write the names of such persons, inasmuch as they are unbelievers. Yea, far be it from me to make any mention of them, until they repent and return to[a true belief in] Christ's passion, which is our resurrection.
Compare that with scripture:
1 Corinthians 11:26
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

Likewise Justin Martyr is proclaiming that the Christ came in the flesh and was crucified for our sake, by reciting the words of the Christ that established how he was to be remembered, even before he was to be killed.
This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. Hence the requirements of the Old Testament have been paid for by his blood, so that a New Testament can be established. And this New Testament is according to the receiving of the Spirit of God through faith in the Christ, so that each man may know God for himself.

Therefore we further note that Justin Martyr is pointing out that it is us the partakers, who are being transmuted by acknowledging the Divine Love come in flesh and blood and displayed on the cross.
but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, 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.

Compare with scripture:
Hebrews 2:14
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

 

[childeye]

Except the writings of the ECF are not scripture. Perhaps it would be best to put that aside and look at what scripture says and what it does/could mean? (Not that we have not done this on more than one occasion......LOL)

I see nothing wrong with the writings. They're simply misunderstood.

 

[Pegasus]

Do as you like with that information.

Hey Jim. The quoted fathers were responding to what exactly?

 

[Jim Parker]

Hey Jim. The quoted fathers were responding to what exactly?

They were pointing out that the apostles had taught them that the bread of the Eucharist became the body (flesh) of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ. They didn't try to explain how. They just taught what the apostles had taught them.

 

[Jim Parker]

A very good point.

It totally misses the point.

 

[Johan]

Eating and drinking has to do with growing.

1Pe 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:

When we drink and eat the Word/Jesus we grow up in His Life. This way we become more Like Him. So we eat His righteousness and are righteous like He is. We eat His grace and we become graceful as He is. We eat His holiness and we become holy as He is.

We eat Him and become Him. This eating and drinking is God creating. He is creating the Son for us to be. It is just His delight to be a Father and for us to grow up to be the same. Giving His glorious Life for us to be. So let us learn to eat and to drink.

 

[Johan]

The Eucharist has no power. It is just a sign for us that needs to be reminded to eat Him. The power is in eating Him. He is the Word. The power is in the Word. In the Eucharist we eat the bread and drink the wine and our bodies grow because of the food for the body. In the Word we eat the Word and grow in the Spirit as the Word is the bread and the wine of the Spirit.

 

[Douglas Summers]

Eating and drinking has to do with growing.

Hi Johan, Eating and drinking has to do with sustaining life.

 

[childeye]

They were pointing out that the apostles had taught them that the bread of the Eucharist became the body (flesh) of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ. They didn't try to explain how. They just taught what the apostles had taught them.

On the contrary, I see them saying that the apostles had taught them that the flesh and blood of Jesus became the bread and wine, and "the how" is, as in remembrance of him and his death.

 

[Pegasus]

They were pointing out that the apostles had taught them that the bread of the Eucharist became the body (flesh) of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ. They didn't try to explain how. They just taught what the apostles had taught them.

Actually they were refuting the Gnostics who did not believe Christ had a human body of flesh and blood. Thus pointing out how can these Gnostics deny Christ was flesh and blood when He told us to eat the bread as His flesh and the cup as His soon to be shed blood.

The context is important as transubstantiation was not confirmed church doctrine as obligatory until the 4th Lateran council 1215.

The only early father who I know of which uses the bread of Life discourse to discuss body and blood of Christ is Clement of Alexandria. You may have other sources which you can share.

Clement of Alexander, who is quoted often by Catholic apologists said thus:

“Eat ye my flesh,” He says, “and drink my blood.” Such is the suitable food which the Lord ministers, and He offers His flesh and pours forth His blood, and nothing is wanting for the children’s growth. O amazing mystery. We are enjoined to cast off the old and carnal corruption, as also the old nutriment, receiving in exchange another new regimen, that of Christ, receiving Him if we can, to hide Him within; and that, enshrining the Savior in our souls, we may correct the affections of our flesh.” (Paedagogus 1:6)

Is this one you have seen before?

 

[Edward]

It is a direct reference to the Eucharist in which the bread is IN FACT the body of Christ and the wine is IN FACT the blood of Christ.
The writers of the primitive church confirm that understanding was what was taught by the apostles.

Long story short, I think this nails it. I think that on a spiritual level, there's something very significant about partaking in Christ's flesh and blood. I'm not sure exactly what, but...it may have to do with our DNA. Man's DNA is a two stranded cord. God's DNA is probably a three stranded cord...and a three stranded cord is not easily broken. It would contain the record of what our Lord is, what we were before the fall, and what we are being slowly transformed back into while we walk the earth in Christ before His return.

I think, lol. It has to be something like that, or He wouldn't have told us to do it. There's a higher spiritual significance to communion than is normally recognized.

 

[Jim Parker]

Actually they were refuting the Gnostics who did not believe Christ had a human body of flesh and blood.

Rather than gnostics, that would be the docetists (from the Greek: δοκέω [dokeō] ) meaning to give the appearance of, or to seem to be. They taught that Jesus was not material but only seemed to be and only seemed to suffer.

The context is important as transubstantiation was not confirmed church doctrine as obligatory until the 4th Lateran council 1215.

The comments of the fathers whom I cited have nothing to do with transubstantiation which was an invention of the scholastics of the 11th and 12th century and had great influence in the west but none at all in the east.

Because they predated the scholastics by many centuries, none of the writers which I posted would have known anything about the "transubstantiation" innovation.

I cited them because they provide documentation of the earliest teaching of the post-apostolic church (from the late 1st century including contemporaries of the apostles) that the universal teaching of the church was that the bread and wine of the Eucharist were, in fact, the body and blood of the LORD.

Transubstantiation was simply an attempt to apply Aristotelian logic (with which the scholastics had become infatuated) to the Faith of the church, a mistaken attempt in my opinion. In the eastern Church, we are content to admit we do not know how God does what He does and refer to the "Sacraments" as "Mysteries."