It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Body and Blood of Christ

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: mekhanics

Yep very Paulian - the fake apostle


CANON IV
through faith alone, the grace of justification;




posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767




Road to Damascus


Funny other followers of Christ never independently witnessed Sauls transformation on that road

www.huffingtonpost.com...


The vision of Jesus that changed Paul from a Pharisaic Jew to a Christian Jew happened, says Luke’s Acts of the Apostles, on the road to Damascus. That event is so important that Luke records it three times for maximum emphasis: first, as it happens (9:1-19); next, as Paul tells it to the Roman officer in Jerusalem (22:3-21); and, finally, as Paul tells it to the Jewish king, Agrippa II at Caesarea Maritima (26:1-18). But that triple account, written around 50 years after Paul’s death, has two major historical problems.

The first problem is that, according to Acts, Paul is travelling to Damascus empowered with authority from the high-priest to arrest dissident Christian Jews and bring them back to Jerusalem for punishment. But, whatever about high-priestly power in Judea, it could never have been exercised across Roman provincial borders as far away as Damascus. On the other hand, Paul himself tells the Galatians that after that vocational vision, “I went away at once into Arabia, and afterwards I returned to Damascus” (Galatians 1:11-17). Paul’s vision, in the city of Damascus is much more likely as venue than on the road to Damascus.

Persecutor and persecuted were probably members of the Damascus synagogue where Paul had most likely received his previous Pharisaic education.

The second problem is that Luke’s triple version describes Paul as seeing “a light” and hearing “a voice” (9:3-4; 22:6-7; 36:13-14). According to Acts, Paul does not see Jesus’ face but only hears Jesus’s voice.

On the other hand, Paul himself insists that his sight of the heavenly Jesus makes him equal in authority with the Twelve Apostles who saw the earthly Jesus. As he argues in his first letter to the Corinthians: “Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” (9:1). And later: “Last of all, as to one untimely born, he was seen also by me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God” (15:8-9).

One major conclusion from those divergent accounts is that Acts never gives Paul the title of an apostle sent by and therefore subordinate only to God and Christ. Paul is, for Acts, a messenger sent by and therefore subordinate to Jerusalem and Antioch. His call was emphatically inferior to that of the Twelve Apostles.

For Acts, only those first 12 were “apostles” and Judas’ replacement had to be “one of the males [Greek andres] who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us” (Acts 1:21-22). Acts not only excludes Paul from ever being an apostle, it insures there will never be any more apostles and, above all else, not any women apostles.

The other major conclusion is just as important. Paul already knew enough about the life, death and resurrection of Jesus to persecute his followers for proclaiming its implications to their fellow Jews at Damascus. In Christian gospel, Christian art and Christian mysticism, the risen Christ always retains the wounds of historical crucifixion even or especially on his glorified and transcendental body. Those wounds do not heal or fade. They are forever there.




posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: cosmania

I was going to give you a start until I read this part, "actually kind of cool, having someone else feed you". Yes, but not in this context.

RE: " may stem from a disdain of Christianity and the scandals"

Sorry dude, it's just weird. It's more like now I understand where the scandals came from than any disdain. I think you are not looking at this critically enough and missing just how weird it is to have people sticking out their tongue while on their needs begging for what they are about to receive. Maybe it's some kind of masochistic thing with authority I just don't understand.


edit on 19-5-2017 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
The church is not Christs body, we are His bride, His Gospel


We are his bride? How can Christians be against gay marriage if they think we are "His bride" ?

I've said this before purposely being irreverent but...oh eff it. Does saying you love Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ is male, does that make you a homosexual?

Personally, I think God is woman. And here's why. No man is capable of creating something so beautiful and alluring as a woman. Therefore, God is a woman. Besides, for me at least, since my children are the most sacred thing in my life, and my wife is my sacred holy mother, then it just makes sense to me God must be a women since my children and my wife are the most sacred things in my life.


edit on 19-5-2017 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: booyakasha

Nothing gay about this ritual:



What the heck. Just too weird.


edit on 19-5-2017 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015




my wife is my sacred holy mother,


You've shot yourself in the foot now; all your allusions to sexuality in rituals and you let out your Oedipus Complex


wiki


(in Freudian theory) the complex of emotions aroused in a young child, typically around the age of four, by an unconscious sexual desire for the parent of the opposite sex and wish to exclude the parent of the same sex. (The term was originally applied to boys, the equivalent in girls being called the Electra complex .).



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Ahhm
Maybe it's a spiritual context not a physical context

What's wrong with you?



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Oh wow
They missed out on a star
How will they recover

Guess confession



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   
I think you are making this far more sexual than it needs to be and secretly enjoy the insinuation of the priest sticking body parts in someone as being sexual.

Holy communion is a beautiful mystical event when understood spiritually and practiced under the grace of forgiveness and absolution.

Many people don't believe in hell OP... and I know the heavenly Father wishes to see no one in hell.. but souls have the choice to seperate from divine love therefore sending themselves to an eternal seperation from God.

Someone asked St.pio the great mystic how they should answer people who say that hell doesn't exist... and the reply was " tell them they will believe if they arrive there".. or something to that effect.



edit on 19-5-2017 by Sheye because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-5-2017 by Sheye because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

The Catholic version of communion is divorced from scriptural context. Yes, it is bizarre indeed.

My understanding of the bread and blood is pretty straightforward.


The Bread is a symbol for the Word of God. The Word became flesh. Hence the bread is the flesh of Christ.

The Blood is a symbol for the Stream of Consciousness of Christ. Isaiah 53:11 states that we are justified by His knowledge/thoughts. Compare that to being made clean by the Blood of the Lamb.

Another way to look at it; The Word is gnosis. The blood is epignosis (gnosis in the stream of consciousness, which is metabolized by faith).

So the Bread is simply Gnosis and the Blood, Epignosis.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   
It is amazing that everybody is commenting on the body and blood of Jesus by hazily recalling something they may or may not have read in the Bible. Jesus said himself keep my Commandments to be called a friend. He specifically said do this in memory of me, and was talking about communion. He also said confess your sins, love others, and love God above all. You can read these things in the actual Bible. It's pretty straightforward. And if that's not enough, put down the dang Washington post, get out of the arm chair that you're sitting in, go to a Catholic church and just ask a priest or a layperson. I am sure that they would like to have a discussion with you about this teaching that may be to difficult for you. As Catholics we are not all shut ins and kook aid drinkers, but we are human beings with spiritual inclinations.luke1212


edit on 19-5-2017 by apydomis because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 03:51 PM
link   
It's metaphorical, all of it.

Blood represents life and living because when it is flowing there is life, to drink Jesus' blood means to take in the life that is happening right now. Most people are so caught up in time (having a set schedule to keep up with and a deadline to meet) that they never slow down to take in what is happening right now. Blood represents the Spirit (life) and the Spirit is what makes the blood flow.

Flesh represents the physical or material nature of man. To eat his flesh means to partake in the physical world which you already are. To eat his flesh means for the Spirit to take root in the physical body which it already has done, you being proof of that.

Christianity (all religions) and the church has obfuscated the truth within these parables by teaching billions to take these stories as literal historical fact instead of metaphor. Most of the time the adherents (of all religions, not just Christianity) have been taught these lies from birth so it's all they know and believe that if they think any differently they're going to suffer for eternity. They then teach their children to do the same (or else) and the chain continues down through the generations.

The bible nor any other holy book is meant to be read literally in my opinion, they are metaphorical stories (parables) explaining the human condition and the universe in general, they explain YOU.

edit on 5/19/2017 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 04:17 PM
link   
according to John 6:60 it was a teaching and a not a literal statement.

I assume his body are his "parables" and his blood is "understanding the parables"?



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: LABTECH767

I totally understand and get what you are saying. It's the ritual that is a little weird for me.


Communion, like all the ceremonies and rituals, is supposed to be the worldly signal of the inner spiritual seeming.

The Church (not talking denomination here, but the full body of believers) is the body of Christ. He is in us and we are in Him. So the communion is a ritual intended to celebrate and signify that communion and knitting into the whole. We are one body of believers, made so by Christ.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

So nice of those old Catholic priests to take care of those innocent little boys.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

I will be completely anathema



Next thema please



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 11:28 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015



Originally posted bydfnj2015
I understand the importance of having rituals and having people experience being sacred. But there is something just really odd for me with the idea of taking the sacrament of receiving consecrated bread and wine. The bread has been referred to as the body of Christ. And the wine has been referred to as the blood of Christ. I once worked with engineer from Indonesia, he was probably a Muslim, and he referred to Christians as "blood drinkers". The idea of drinking blood is a little weird.


They are all symbolic and metaphoric representations of a spiritual nature…

I wrote the t. below outlining the true meanings…

His Flesh is the Word and his Blood is the Holy Spirit


The short version, is that the body/flesh is symbolically represented by Bread…and the Bread is a metaphor for the spoken word…The Spoken word being Gods truth…And the blood is a metaphor for Spirit…

We take, (or symbolically eat) Gods Truth/Bread into ourselves, which in turn connects too the Spirit/Blood within us…

Peace…


- JC




edit on 20-5-2017 by Joecroft because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Joecroft

I believe the spoken Word (body/bread) can be compared to a projection. The information is there but only when it is spoken (projected) can others see and experience it, so in that sense I believe the spoken Word represents the physical world around us, it is there for us to learn from just like with words being spoken.

Only when you take in the Word (bread/physical nature) do you receive nourishment and only when you receive that nourishment can the Spirit (blood) flow through you and give you life. Once you stop eating, the life (Spirit) will leave your body and that is what we call death.

The church (or "body of Christ") is supposedly who has the answers but very few realize that the church has taken the place of the true body which is the physical universe. The church is a bastardization of the true place of communion which is the world we all inhabit. They have corrupted the Word and changed it into something it was never meant to be.


Matthew 7
9 Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone?


The founder of the church was Peter, Peter means "rock" (which is a stone). The church does not give people bread to eat, it gives them stones/rocks which is why its followers' hearts are hardened to the truth.
edit on 5/20/2017 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecroft

Another interesting note, a stone is considered to be a "small rock". The two founders of the church are Paul and Peter, each name meaning "small" and "rock" respectively. A "small rock" is a stone which is what the church feeds its followers.

If you dig just below the surface of the literal interpretation and reach into the etymology of certain words or names and/or histories of biblical locations you'll begin to see the underlying symbolism within the words and stories.

Jesus said he spoke in parables and he is the Word of God according to Christians. What else is considered to be God's Word? The bible.

The bible (God's Word/Jesus) speaks in parables that most people hear but do not understand. They haven't dug below the surface far enough to find the seed, that includes theists and atheists alike.
edit on 5/20/2017 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2017 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1



Originally posted 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I believe the spoken Word (body/bread) can be compared to a projection. The information is there but only when it is spoken (projected) can others see and experience it, so in that sense I believe the spoken Word represents the physical world around us, it is there for us to learn from just like with words being spoken.


Yeah, “projection” is good way of describing it. The Spirit has to connect to the spoken/bread truth too…it’s a two way communication, in that the Blood/Spirit confirms the spoken Bread/Word and vice versa.

For example, “The Father and I are one” = spoken truth/bread; The result = connection to the Holy Spirit… Wisdom and Truth are contained within that statement, but the Son/Soul must come to realisation of it…

Of course, connecting with Spirit, is a much longer and trickier process (partly due to religion) than that example…because as you probably know the Spirit teaches in a pure form of understanding…which can be quick or/and happen over a longer period of time…




Originally posted 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Only when you take in the Word (bread/physical nature) do you receive nourishment and only when you receive that nourishment can the Spirit (blood) flow through you and give you life. Once you stop eating, the life (Spirit) will leave your body and that is what we call death.


Well, the physical aspects like body and blood are being matched up with the metaphorical i.e. Word/Truth and Spirit…I’ve pretty much gone with a strict Esoteric view…but I guess one could go with Exoteric and Esoteric view combined…

Remember this verse from the NT…it’s not quoted very often…



Matthew 4:4
“Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God”


This kinda gets into what your talking about, with the bread keeping you physically alive etc…Which is actually another key reason IMO, as to why the bread metaphor was used for Gods spiritual truth. The verse above expresses the idea that Spirit and Truth, is what leads to “real life”…



Originally posted 3NL1GHT3N3D1
The church (or "body of Christ") is supposedly who has the answers but very few realize that the church has taken the place of the true body which is the physical universe. The church is a bastardization of the true place of communion which is the world we all inhabit. They have corrupted the Word and changed it into something it was never meant to be.


The truth lies dormant within most religious texts; just waiting to be discovered by those who genuinely seek truth and don’t just accept the outward religion. In the mean time those under the outward religion are kept in check through threats i.e. Hell…until they spiritual grow up, have their hearts tested and move into the real spiritual truth.

Sometimes I think this is a brilliant conception to hide truth so that others will seek it out etc…On other days I think the truth should just be spoken plainly. Unfortunately ,you/me/they will always be up against the “Religions Truth” lol…it’s the ultimate catch 22…

- JC



edit on 20-5-2017 by Joecroft because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join