Three Move Checkmate: 666

[threesixteen]

Three Move Checkmate: 666


hi fellow Believers and God Bless you,

John chapter six is one of my very favorite chapters. Recently i have discovered even more how this chapter makes very clear that the Body and Blood are real, not symbolic.

In Chess, there is a three-move checkmate. I believe God showed me a three move checkmate to prove that the idea of the Body and Blood being only symbolic is from the spirit of Antichrist.

Here it goes:

1st Move (King pawn to e4). Revelation 13:18 "Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666."

Note: Most Bible students believe that the Beast, Antichrist, and the lawless one are all the same person, or at least part of the same organization and working together. Hence, the number 666 can be associated with the Beast, the lawless one, the Antichrist, and the spirit of Antichrist.

2nd Move (Queen to g4). In the Douay Rheims, and the King James (my two favorite translations) John 4:3 is worded like this:

"And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist"

I repeat the phrase "IS COME IN THE FLESH." In the Catholic Church, we believe that EVERY DAY during Holy Mass, Jesus comes in the flesh in Holy Communion. The Eucharist is Jesus' Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, according to our teachings. Jesus Christ came 2000 years ago in the flesh, but also comes every day in the flesh in this most Blessed Sacrament. To deny this, according to this passage of Scripture, is part of the spirit of Antichrist--just like denying He EVER came in the flesh would be from the spirit of Antichrist.

Now, I'm not saying anyone who denies Jesus is come in the flesh during Holy Communion IS the Antichrist--no, I'm just saying that this idea COMES from the spirit of Antichrist, whether the person or church realizes it or not. Is the person who may be deceived by the spirit of Antichrist in this case still saved? OF COURSE! But they are missing the Body and Blood, the precious Gift that Jesus gave on His last night with His disciples.

3rd Move (Queen to g6, CHECKMATE). John 6:66 "After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him."

Yes, thats right John 6:66, the only 666 in the New Testament. Now, why did these disciples walk away from Jesus? Its very clear it was because they didnt understand / couldn't handle the teaching of eating His flesh and drinking His blood. Earlier, in verse 52, the Jews couldn't understand nor accept this teaching. John 6:52 "The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" How did Jesus respond? By admitting that He was only speaking symbolically? NO! He next repeats His strong literal meaning for FOUR VERSES IN A ROW!

John 6:53-56 "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. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him."

A bit later, in verse 60, His disciples begin to be perturbed. John 6:60 "Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?" Does Jesus put them at ease, does He admit that they have understood Him too literally? NO! He only asks if this teaching has offended them--which it had. John 6:61 "But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?"

Finally in verse 66, many of His disciples actually left Him because of His teaching. John 666 "From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him." Did Jesus stop them, "NO WAIT! I was only speaking SYMBOLICALLY!!" Again, no. He knew they had understood Him correctly. If this was just a simple misunderstanding, if the disciples had taken literally a symbolism, do you think Jesus would have let it cost them their souls by walking away from their faith?!?!

In summary, the fact that the Protestants have walked away from the teaching of the real Body and real Blood, is no small thing to God. "Oh well, they lost my Body and Blood, no big deal." NO!!! To God it is a very big deal! It is a huge blow to the church in general, the loss and theft of one of the greatest, if not THE greatest gift Christ gave to the church besides the HOLY SPIRIT. In fact, God wants us to know that the disciples who rebelled against this teaching were not using good sense, but were actually being influenced by the spirit of Antichrist, the Beast, 666.




Amen and thanks for listening,

three sixteen

 

[Johny]

You post at christianforums, don't you? :wink:

 

[Vic C.]

Hi there...

There is a fourth move;

John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Do you keep ALL of His commandments? Do ANY of us keep ALL of His commandments? It seems we are ALL guilty of picking and choosing which to keep and which to not keep.

Do you, for instance, keep the commandment set forth in Matthew 28:19-20? How about the one stated in Exodus 20:4-5? Or Exodus 20:8?

Luke 22:19 says;

And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Jesus never commands when this is to be done, but does state it should be done in rememberance of Him. Now if we want to get technical and go "by the book", this was done on the first seder, which occurs but once a year. :wink:

Paul does tell us in 1 Cor 11:26

"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come."

Again, no reference is made to how often. 8-)

Maybe, just maybe, Jesus WAS talking metaphorically and was testing to see who would take His word unconditionally or who would be scared off by such stark language.

I am aware the RCC believes He comes in the flesh each and every time communion is received, but the Bible states He will come back in the flesh (second advent) to regain and rule His Kingdom. I believe that to be a future event.

I noticed in your post the words "In the Catholic Church" and "according to our teachings" but what saith the Scripture on this issue?

 

[thessalonian]

I'll not comment on the OP. I think it is worth considering, the theory put forth. It is very coincidental that John 6:66 is what it is.

Jesus never commands when this is to be done, but does state it should be done in rememberance of Him. Now if we want to get technical and go "by the book", this was done on the first seder, which occurs but once a year. :wink:

I don't know that the author of the OP says how often it is to be done either. The Catholic Church makes the Eucharist available daily. However in the precepts of the Church reception is only required once a year. Rememberence does not equal symbol in any dictionary I have ever owned. There certainly is a symbolic component to the Lord's Supper with the bread and the wine, being crushed and brought together, symbolizing the uniting of Christians that takes place in the Lord's Supper. However the greek word anemesis is a word that does not just me rememberance as many English translations render it. The meaning of the word is much deeper, it is to commemorate and actually to make present. In the Old Testament the pascal sacrifice actually made present the first pascal sacrifice for the jews. It was more than just a memory of something long past. In reality the Exodus was a forshadowing, or a symbol if you will, of the real event, i.e. the freeing of men from the bondage of sin. This is not a mere rememberance but a present day occurance in the partaking of the Eucharist, which is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of our Lord.

I don't
Paul does tell us in 1 Cor 11:26

"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come."

Again, no reference is made to how often. 8-)

You seem to be hung up on this how often thing. It's not making a point.

Maybe, just maybe, Jesus WAS talking metaphorically and was testing to see who would take His word unconditionally or who would be scared off by such stark language.

"My flesh is true food, my blood is true drink" is not the language of metaphore. Sorry. When it says "unless you eat the flesh of the son of man.." The greek is very explicit, "to gnaw or chew". Jesus makes no effort to call them back when they take him literally "how can he give us is flesh to eat?".

I am aware the RCC believes He comes in the flesh each and every time communion is received,

Actually that is the Lutheran view. We believe it becomes the body and blood of Christ when the preist consecrates the bread and the wine at the high point of the Mass.

but the Bible states He will come back in the flesh (second advent) to regain and rule His Kingdom. I believe that to be a future event.

Well the teaching is not that the Eucharist is the physical flesh of Christ but the sacramental flesh. It is not like taking a bite out of his arm, though he is truely present. You are quite right that Christ will come as a man standing on a pair of feet at the end of time. But that's not what we're talking about.

Blessings

 

[threesixteen]

dear forum moderator,

i would first of all like to thank you for not locking this post and then going back and changing what i wrote, like christianforums.com did. Thank you, and i appreciate you letting these thoughts and biblical ideas be discussed freely.

Now onto what you wrote. Do i keep the Great Commission? Yes! "Go into all the world and preach the Gospel!" or as St. Matthew puts it: "Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." (by the way, this is a reference to His being with us till the end of the world in the Body and Blood.)

I have been a missionary with Youth With A Mission (Protestants) twice. I often evangelize, and not just to Protestants..... My whole life is directed towards bringing the lost to Christ. And i believe I have more tools to do it than you: the Body and Blood (which can be offered to God for the salvation of sinners!) and the Rosary and devotion to Mary and the Saints.

Now how often should one eat the REAL BODY of Christ? EVERYDAY!!!! It is not required of course. But as the expression goes, "you are what you eat...." The more one eats Christ the more one becomes like Him. Its up to us: how bad do we want it? Jesus said, "Blessed are those that hunger and thirst for righteousness." There is no better way to show God you are hungry then to get your behind to Holy Communion every day. It is part of being spiritually poor (Sermon on the Mount). If you dont eat often the Body and Blood you are saying to God that you can live the Christian life in your own strength. Yes the Holy Spirit will still guide you without it, but you wont have the strength to overcome many temptations. Sometimes, the moment i take communion, God allows many trials and sufferings because: He knows I will have the strength to overcome. Your life might not get easier if you become Catholic and go to daily Mass, but you will be able to do more for souls.



Thank you again for being fair and not instantly censuring this.

threesixteen

 

[Gendou Ikari]

You do realize that checkmate is possible in two moves?

 

[Vic C.]

dear forum moderator,

i would first of all like to thank you for not locking this post and then going back and changing what i wrote, like christianforums.com did. Thank you, and i appreciate you letting these thoughts and biblical ideas be discussed freely....

Not a problem as long as it's kept civil. I'm interested in one's conduct as they debate as well as what's being debated.

You seem to be hung up on this how often thing. It's not making a point.

I guess i was being vague. I know many who believe that more is better, which is not Scriptual. No amount of cummunion will get anyone colser to God. This relationship we have with the Lord is due to the indwelling of His spirit in us. We are sealed by that, not by a wafer or some unleavened bread. That was my point.

Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

You do realize that checkmate is possible in two moves?

I thought so when i read the OP. ;-)

 

[threesixteen]

lol

sorry, God hasn't showed me what the spiritual 2 move checkmate is yet, nor what it has to do with. This idea takes three moves to develop however. The first quote, Rev 13:18, is necessary to show that the Antichrist spirit is associated with the number 666. The second quote, 1 John 4:3, is necessary to show that the spirit of Antichrist is associated with denying Jesus IS COME in the flesh, and the third quote, John 666, ties it all together.

But i do pray God shows me the two move checkmate.



peace,

threesixteen

 

[Gendou Ikari]

John 6:63 (King James Version) It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

John 3:8 (King James Version) The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

I really fail to see how eating a piece of dough is going to bring us closer to God. That's just a carnal ritual and should never be substituted for anything more.

The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" How did Jesus respond? By admitting that He was only speaking symbolically? NO! He next repeats His strong literal meaning for FOUR VERSES IN A ROW!

Since when does Jesus Christ explain Himself?

Mark 4:11-12 (King James Version) 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: 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.

 

[thessalonian]

John 6:63 (King James Version) Since when does Jesus Christ explain Himself?

[ .

Well v. 6:66 is about his disciples, not the Jews. He always explained himself to his disciples.

Mark 4
[33] With many such parables he spoke the word to them, as they were able to hear it;
[34] he did not speak to them without a parable, but privately to his own disciples he explained everything.

His disciples took him literaly and he let them walk away so the point still stands.

As for v. 63 which you quoted, "the flesh profiteth nothing"?? What flesh? Jesus flesh? I surely hope that is not what you mean because Jesus says a little earlier in John 6 "this bread that I will give is my FLESH for the life of the world". That flesh was/is of great profit to us. It paid the price for our redemption. Now it does make sense that our flesh does not profit from the Eucharist as it is food for our soul. As for the Eucharist just being dough, do you find it impossible for God to tranform that dough in to something different. Can God not raise sons of abraham from stones? Can he make an axe float or a man walk on water? How about a virgin concieve or a few loaves and fish feed 5000 men. Shall I list some more impossible miracles. Surely he could transform mere bread and water in to food for our souls. Or do you limit God?

 

[Georges]

John 6:66 that is amazing......

Especially when the verse designations didn't occur before 1560, or there abouts.....huh...talk about random luck...........

 

[ArtGuy]

You do realize that checkmate is possible in two moves?

It's actually possible in zero moves:

 

[thessalonian]

John 6:66 that is amazing......

Especially when the verse designations didn't occur before 1560, or there abouts.....huh...talk about random luck...........

Yes, that is amazing. It was also about the same time a man (symbolized by 6 in scripture) removed 6 books from the Bible to come up with 66 books. (there were of course 73 books, 7 symbolizing perfection and 3 the trinity.)

And do you know that with the subtraction of those 6 books that the central verse in scripture became Psalm 118:8. [8] It is better to take refuge in the LORD
than to put confidence in man.

Many people didn't pay heed and followed after those men of the reformation. That is if your one who keeps track of these sorts of things. I don't pay them much mind. :

Hey I read this kind of numerology on a Protestant website first, trying to use it against Catholics. Two can play at this sort of game. :

 

[threesixteen]

Especially when the verse designations didn't occur before 1560, or there abouts.....huh...talk about random luck...........

the funny thing is, God knows the future. 8-)

 

[Gendou Ikari]

If the Catholic is the chosen church of God then I don't even want to known what kind of a god He is. The Catholic Church is nothing more than a bunch of men trying to play holy. The Inquisitions were pure evil! All of their cleansings of the Muslims and Gnostics was evil. I even bet that all of the decorations from one Cathedral alone can end world hunger. :P

As for v. 63 which you quoted, "the flesh profiteth nothing"?? What flesh? Jesus flesh? I surely hope that is not what you mean because Jesus says a little earlier in John 6 "this bread that I will give is my FLESH for the life of the world". That flesh was/is of great profit to us. It paid the price for our redemption. Now it does make sense that our flesh does not profit from the Eucharist as it is food for our soul. As for the Eucharist just being dough, do you find it impossible for God to tranform that dough in to something different. Can God not raise sons of abraham from stones? Can he make an axe float or a man walk on water? How about a virgin concieve or a few loaves and fish feed 5000 men. Shall I list some more impossible miracles. Surely he could transform mere bread and water in to food for our souls. Or do you limit God?

I fail to see why Catholics want to make this one part of Scripture literal.

John 10:7 (King James Version) Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.

John 1:36 (King James Version) And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!

John 15:1 (King James Version) I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

Does Jesus become a door daily? Maybe He really is a lamb or maybe He is a vine. Do you see the stupidity of taking the drinking of the blood seriously?

 

[thessalonian]

dupe

 

[thessalonian]

Another prot who's best arguements seem to be history and broadbrushing all Catholics as evil. Judging the hearts of men. Sad.

"My flesh is true food, my blood is true drink" is not the language of metaphore. Sorry.

Truly, truly is not the language of metaphore.
[53] So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;


When did he say "truly, truly I am a door" or "truly, truly, I am a vine".

 

[thessalonian]

John 6:66 that is amazing......

Especially when the verse designations didn't occur before 1560, or there abouts.....huh...talk about random luck...........

What's funny is the protestants did it to themselves. It was the 1560 Geneva Bible (protestant) of which you speak.

 

[threesixteen]

good points Thessalonian and LOL at the last post :

 

[Imagican]

All of this 'sounds' good. But then we all know that there are MANY things that 'sound' good but have no basis in reality whatsoever. I believe that is what you have offered here. Empty words.

For the reference that you made is completely misleading. You decide to skip a bunch of verses and then indicate that the one you skip to alludes to what you want it to 'mean' instead of what was really indicated.

Let me explain. The disciples DID NOT depart from Christ for His offering of an explanation of the 'flesh and blood'. They departed when He explained that:

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

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

58This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

59These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.

60Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?

61When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?

62What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

63It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

64But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

65And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

66From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

67Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

68Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

69And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

70Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

71He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.

Note that it was a 'lack' of understanding that convicted the ones that 'followed Him no more', it really had absolutely NOTHING to do with 'eating anything'.

I am well aware of how easy it is to form our 'own' understanding of scripture. Often we are seemingly 'lead' to certain scripture and often believe that it has specific meaning to us for this reason.

Your story offered is a good one. But in my opinion, no more than that; 'a good story'. We WERE told to offer the sacrament in His memory. But, we were NEVER told exactly how often to offer it.

And this acceptance of the 'literal', no basis for it either. It is symbolic that we offer this in 'remembrance'. We cannot bring the actual event back any more than we can make the bread, (wafer; and where did that come from?), or wine actual blood or flesh. It is symbolic not actual.

And, since we were told to do this in remembrance, why does the Catholic Church teach 'against' it. I mean, when one changes it to 'suit themselves', it becomes of NO effect and something of their making rather than a symbolic act that actually happened. Regardless of what you have come to believe, the sacrament was offered at a 'supper'. So, to actually give humbrance to the event, shouldn't it be followed as closely as possible? I mean it's obvious that Paul taught that this was to be offered at a 'supper'. It becomes completely apparent when one reads his rebuke towards the Corinthians for participating for the sake of 'food' rather than the 'remembrance'. So obviously there was an 'actual' meal partaken of, either before or after the sacrament.