|
Author
|
Topic: Drink His Blood?
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
Hi noble. Welcome! It's nice to meet you.
I think the third cup, the cup of redemption, was the covenant cup. Some say it represented the blood of the Passover lamb. The fourth cup is the one our Lord Jesus Christ said He would not drink until He drank it new with His people in His Father's kingdom.
The four cups of wine represent four promises made to Israel:
•The Cup of Sanctification – based on God’s statement, “I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians”
•The Cup of Judgment or Deliverance- based on God’s statement, “I will deliver you from slavery to them”
•The Cup of Redemption – based on God’s statement, “I will redeem you with an outstretched arm”
•The Cup of Praise or Restoration – based on God’s statement, “I will take you to be my people, and I will be your God”
Matthew 26:27-29 (NASB)
27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. 29 "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom."
Jewish Scholar David Daube on the Fourth Cup
There is… in Matthew and Mark a reference also to the fourth and last cup of the Passover liturgy. It is contained in the words: ‘I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine until I drink it new in my father’s kingdom’ or ‘in the kingdom of God’. The meaning is that the fourth cup will not be taken, as would be the normal thing, at a subsequent stage of the service; it will be postponed till the kingdom is fully established… [In this light,] the notice that ‘when they had sung a hymn they went out into the mount of Olives’ now acquires a fuller sense. The implication is that they go out directly after the ‘hymn’, without drinking the fourth cup and probably also without reciting ‘the blessing of the song’. This portion of the liturgy is postponed till the arrival of the actual, final kingdom.
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged | 
|
|
noble
Advanced Member
Member # 11022
|
posted
May I add something here?
Jesus participated annually in Passover (Pesach} Now the Passover week consisted of two feasts, the first being the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and the second the Feast of First fruits. Unleavened Bread occurred usually on or about Wednesday and the Feast of First Fruits was on Friday or Sabbath Eve.
"The Last Supper" was the Seder or Feast of Unleavened Bread. I won't go into the particulars of the whole Feast, but there is a piece of Matzah that is broken and hidden away called an Afikomen. Also in the meal are 4 cups of wine each has a function
1st cup: I will bring you out of Egypt
2nd Cup I will deliver you from bondage
3rd cup: I will redeem you with an outstretched arm
4th cup: I will take you to Me for a people
During the meal the Afikomen will be found and the host will break it in pieces and pass out the pieces representing the Manna in the dessert. The Bread of life. This is what Jesus was probably holding when he Claimed "this is My body broken for you"
Then near the end of the meal Jesus took the third cup, Claiming "this is my Blood of the Covenant, poured out for the many for the forgiveness of sin. [this could have been the 4th cup] We are 'redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb'
Posts: 81 | From: North Carolina | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Bloodbought
Advanced Member
Member # 4365
|
posted
Yes, I think that is pretty much it in a nutshell.
And just as Adam disbelieved and performed the once for all act of disobedience by eating the forbidden fruit, which brought death upon all men, so by the obedience of one, Jesus Christ, all who perform the once for all act of feeding upon Him shall be saved. All who want to be saved must eat that bread and drink that cup. This is not the Lords supper of course, but the Lords supper represents it. The Lords supper means nothing until we eat His flesh and drink His blood once for all. Then we can come to the Lords table as often as we like.
Posts: 822 | From: Ireland | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
I think I understand now.
John 6 says that when people eat bread it becomes a part of them and gives them life, but eventually they die. The Lord is the Bread from Heaven, and the life He gives is Eternal Life. John 6 is a call to have faith in Him.
The Lord's Supper is for those who already have faith in Him. It is in remembrance of Him.
John 6 is looking forward; the Lord's Supper is looking back.
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
quote:
I don’t believe that John 6:51-57 is referring to the Lords supper since this sacrament hadn’t been established at this time.
True. But then, actually, nothing had really been established at that time except that He could perform miracles.
That is a good commentary. Faith in Christ and repentance are the requirements for salvation, I agree.
But the Lord's Supper is not about salvation. It is about His sacrifice, and His grace, and about us sharing in His life lived through us. It is a celebration we do not participate in until after we have been saved.
Eternal Life is more than salvation. It is life lived more abundantly, spiritually. The fruit of the Spirit, and the Armor of God, and many other spiritual gifts. Eternal Life is Christ in us, and us in Him.
Look at this again:
John 6
53So 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 yourselves. 54“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55“For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.
We know that we must be born again to be saved (John 3:1-7). The Lord's Supper is not about regeneration, but abiding. Prayer, Bible study, baptism, the Lord's Supper, and obedience are all ways of abiding in Him.
He is the Bread of Life. He is the True Vine.
Faith in Him is certainly the primary focus. But it goes beyond believing He is who He says He is. It addresses abiding in Him.
My favorite teacher, Wiersbe, agrees with you. He doesn't think John 6 is about the Lord's Supper.
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Bloodbought
Advanced Member
Member # 4365
|
posted
I don’t believe that John 6:51-57 is referring to the Lords supper since this sacrament hadn’t been established at this time.
Here is another interesting commentary on this passage.
“This is the section of the discourse that is claimed most confidently to refer to the Holy Communion. The language of eating the flesh and drinking the blood is said to be explicable only, or at least most naturally, in terms of the sacrament. But is this so? Surely not! The objections already urged remain, and the very strength of the language is against it. The eating and drinking spoken of are the means of bringing eternal life (v. 54), and they are absolutely unqualified. Who is going to argue seriously that the one thing necessary for eternal life is to receive Holy Communion? Nothing is said, for example, about faith; is it not necessary to believe if we are to have life? Again, “flesh” is not commonly used with reference to the sacrament. In every other New Testament passage referring to it the word is “body.” Ryle further points out that to take the view we are opposing “is to interpose a bodily act between the soul of man and salvation. This is a thing for which there is no precedent in Scripture. The only things without which we cannot be saved are repentance and faith.” I am not contending that we cannot apply the passage helpfully to the sacrament. But I very strongly doubt whether this is the primary meaning. It seems much better to think of the words as meaning first and foremost the appropriation of Christ.
52 Not unnaturally the Jews are perplexed, for the saying is not an easy one. “Began to argue sharply” is not quite what we would have expected. It implies that some were strongly for Jesus, though the following narrative makes it clear that they must have been outnumbered. Their question indicates that they do not understand how it is possible for Jesus to give them his flesh. The mechanics of it bother them.130 For the pattern of misunderstanding a saying of Jesus see on 2:20.
53 Jesus does not retract one iota of his statement. He prefixes his reply with the solemn “I tell you the truth” (used for the fourth time in this chapter; see vv. 26, 32, 47 and the note on 1:51). What he says is thus shown to be deliberate and important; he wants there to be no doubt about it. He adds to what he has said before. He has spoken about eating bread that is himself, and as giving his flesh. Now he speaks explicitly of eating his flesh, and he adds the drinking of his blood, an idea that would be especially abhorrent to Jews because they were forbidden to partake of blood (Gen. 9:4, etc.). Both “eat” and “drink” are aorists, denoting once-for-all action, not a repeated eating and drinking, such as would be appropriate to the sacrament. And this eating and drinking are absolutely necessary for eternal life. Those who do not eat and drink in the way Jesus says have no life. Eating and drinking Christ’s flesh and blood thus appears to be a very graphic way of saying that people must take Christ into their innermost being. There is, moreover, a reference to the death of Christ, as we saw on verse 51. Flesh and blood in separation point to death. The words, then, are a cryptic allusion to the atoning death that Jesus would die, together with a challenge to enter the closest and most intimate relation with him. They are to be interpreted in the light of verse 47.
54 What has been put negatively is now stated positively in a way typical of this Gospel. Anyone who eats Christ’s flesh and drinks his blood has eternal life, and he will be raised up by Christ at the last day. The word for “eats” is different136 from that used previously, and it is used again in the following verses (56, 57, 58; elsewhere in the New Testament only in Matt. 24:38; John 13:18). It properly applies to somewhat noisy feeding (like “munch” or “crunch”). There is often the notion of eating with enjoyment (so in Matt. 24:38). It is a startling word in this context, and stresses the actuality of the partaking of Christ that is in mind. Some suggest that it points to a literal feeding and therefore to the sacrament. But this does not follow. There is no logic in saying: “The verb is used of literal eating. Therefore eating the flesh of Christ must mean eating the communion bread.” On any showing there is a symbolic element in the “eating,” and it is better to understand it, as in the earlier reference, to receiving Christ. The continuing reference to Christ’s raising up the believer at the last day is interesting. There may be more to eternal life than life in the age to come, but life in that age is certainly prominent.
55 Other things were not food in the true sense. Jesus has already pointed out that the fathers ate the manna in the wilderness and they died (v. 49). His opponents had altogether the wrong idea of what constituted true bread. With Christ’s signs before them they still sought their sustenance apart from him. This verse is an emphatic statement that true food and drink for our deepest needs are to be found in Christ, and by implication in him alone.
56 The close connection between fellowship with Christ and the activity of eating the flesh and drinking the blood is stressed, since Jesus gives what is almost a definition of eating his flesh and drinking his blood. Anyone who so eats and drinks “remains” (the tense is continuous; it denotes more than fleeting contact) in Christ. There is the closest possible relationship so that the eater is in Christ and Christ is in the eater. The thought of abiding is a prominent one in John. It reminds us that the believer enters no temporary state, but a permanent one, with fellowship with the Lord as the predominant note.
57 Jesus comes back to his mission: he had been sent by “the living Father,” where the participle stresses the active quality of life that inheres in the Father. “Because of” is patient of two meanings and probably both are in mind here. First of all, the life of the Son is bound up with that of the Father (it is 5:26 in another form): the Son has no life apart from the Father. And, second, the Son lives for the Father. To do the Father’s will is his very meat (4:34). This forms an analogy whereby the effect of feeding on Christ may be gauged. Notice that no longer does he speak of eating the flesh and drinking the blood, but simply of eating him. The tense is continuous. This way of putting it makes it clearer than ever that it is the taking of Christ within oneself that is meant by the metaphor of eating and drinking. Anyone140 who so receives Christ will have the life that comes only from Christ. And that person will live only for Christ; nothing else will matter. Notice that Christ alone has direct access to the Father. Believers receive life only mediately through Christ.”
NIC NT
Posts: 822 | From: Ireland | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
Thank you. I hope you are willing to bear with me a little longer.
We know this to be true:
Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
We are saved by grace, not works.
But John 6 seems to be referring to something very specific.
John 6
51“I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”
52Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” 53So 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 yourselves. 54“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55“For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57“As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me.
Our Lord was referring to His sacrificial death, but no one understood at the time. Even Satan did not know what the death of Christ would bring. Satan entered into Judas to betray Christ, not realizing this would lead to his own defeat over the souls of men, of those who have faith in Christ.
One commentator wrote this about the Lord’s Supper, or the Eucharist:
The word used for eats in 6:54. Instead of esthio, which is used elsewhere in this chapter (6:5, 23, 26, 31, 49-53, 58), John uses trogo (also in 6:56-58). While esthio is often used metaphorically, trogo is not; it is a word tied almost entirely to the physical process of eating food.
If there is indeed reference here to the Eucharist, a number of questions are raised, and we must be careful not to read into this text all of the later controversies and refinements. The most obvious point of the text would be that there is some connection between partaking of Christ's flesh and blood in the Eucharist and having eternal life. This would be puzzling, since it appears to put this activity on the level of faith. Both faith and this eating and drinking would be necessary for eternal life (6:47, 51). Apparently, it is not for nothing that our Lord commands us to hold Eucharist (1 Cor 11:25)!
This parallel between faith and Eucharist does not, however, deny the primacy of faith. If both are necessary for life, faith is still the more primary in that it is necessary for obtaining the benefits of the Eucharist. God's life is available in the Eucharist because he promises to be present. We do not attract him there or make him present by our faith. He is present where people gather for Eucharist at his command. But if we do not appropriate it rightly by faith, it may do us no good or even cause harm (cf. 1 Cor 10:1-22; 11:27-30). The actual life-giving efficacy in feeding is only appropriated by faith—the Eucharist is not magically efficacious. The Eucharist is a point of contact with divine reality; it is a means of grace, a means of God's power and life in our lives. But it is not a way to manipulate God, nor does it make this spiritual contact by magic, apart from God's own gracious activity and a person's response of faith.
To say the Eucharist is necessary for eternal life is not necessarily as scandalous as it might seem at first. In the strictest sense of the word, very little is absolutely essential, as the thief on the cross demonstrates: all he had was faith in Jesus as the King of the Jews and a desire to be with him. Jesus here is talking about that which is generally necessary. "The sacrament is normally necessary; but it is the communion alone that is vital" (Temple 1945:95); abiding in him on the basis of his sacrificial death is what is essential. In a sense, the necessity of the Eucharist would be similar to saying one must be a member of the church. Here also we could get embroiled in controversies. But suffice it to say, the church in the New Testament is the locus of divine life, the very body of Christ. Eucharist is one of the central features of church life, and it actually effects our oneness, according to Paul (1 Cor 10:16-17). It is an occasion on the social level that feeds the spiritual life by getting in touch with the divine love of God manifest in the divine self-giving on the cross. The New Testament knows nothing of a Christianity apart from the church. The New Testament is very concrete. It points to this man Jesus and says he is the Son of God. And it points to this community and says, Here is the body of Christ, the center of divine life on earth in its fullest expression. The necessity of the Eucharist is a part of the necessity of the church. It is a part of God's dealing with us as material and relational beings.
Here, then, is some of the deepest New Testament teaching about the Eucharist. The focus of this teaching is on sacrifice and shared life. These are inseparable since there is no sharing of life without the laying down of life. The once-for-all sacrifice of Christ is the pouring out of his life for the life of the world, bringing forgiveness and a new power of life. That sacrifice also shows us the deepest reality about God—his love—and about life: all true life is sacrificial. Life is a matter of exchange: my life for yours, yours for mine. In this sacrificial web of exchange we find the communion, the community, of the Godhead. At Eucharist we receive into ourselves, into our bodies and souls, the life-giving power of God, and precisely by eating and drinking we proclaim the Lord's once-for-all death until he comes (1 Cor 11:26).
The insistence on the Eucharist, this physical activity for eternal life, is theologically and spiritually very important. It protects us from an overly cerebral or falsely spiritual form of Christianity. Salvation itself is something that encompasses all of life. It is a transformation of life and a renewal of life, including physical life. Salvation is not simply a matter of having right opinions or even right actions. Indeed, it is something larger than the human dimension, since all of creation is involved (Rom 8). John teaches us not to simply embrace spirit and oppose matter like the Gnostics did. The incarnate one in his very incarnation has shown physical matter to be "spiritual," that is, to share in divine life. Our bodies themselves are to be transformed. So the imagery involved in eating and drinking, in notions of laying down life and interpenetration, is present in this passage and in the Eucharist itself. But more than mere imagery is present—eternal life is present. The divine and human realms meet in the flesh of Jesus, and that is what a sacrament is: a material point of contact between physical and spiritual reality. Jesus' own body is the convergence of these realms, and he provides points of contact for the nourishment of his body, the church. This passage is referring to Christ's death and our life in him, as is the Eucharist. So it is fitting that the Eucharist is alluded to here, though the primary reference is to Jesus' death and the life he offers.
(IVP New Testament Commentary)
So it seems that John 6 is specifically about the Lord's Supper, and while the Lord's Supper is not necessary for salvation, it is VERY IMPORTANT to sharing the grace of our Lord.
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Bloodbought
Advanced Member
Member # 4365
|
posted
Sorry Carol, it was me that wasn’t clear, not you. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
You are right when you say we don’t consume disbelief.
We don’t consume disbelief because we are born with it and it leads us into sin, but Adam and Eve were created perfect, they did not always disbelieve, but were tempted to do so.
Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? 2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. 6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
God wanted this disbelief in Him reversed to belief in Him, and the only way He could do that was to give His Son Jesus as a sacrifice on our behalf, that whoever believes in Him has forgiveness and eternal life.
I don’t know if any of this answers your question as to why Jesus told us to drink His blood when drinking blood was forbidden under the law, but He couldn’t have been referring to literally drinking His blood, because that would be a contradiction of the OT law regarding blood. So I think He must have been referring to drinking His blood figuratively by having faith in His sacrifice as the means by which we are set free from the power and penalty of sin and reconciled to God.
Posts: 822 | From: Ireland | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
Hi Bloodbought,
That was a great response.
I wasn't very clear, was I? I know we don't literally consume disbelief or belief. But disbelief leads to sin, such as Adam eating the forbidden fruit. Belief leads to obedience, such as sharing in the Lord's Supper.
But it's interesting to compare Adam eating the fruit to believers eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ. The forbidden fruit was from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, while our Lord is the Tree of Life.
Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden after eating from the Tree of Knowledge so they could not eat of the Tree of Life. Today believers eat of the Tree of Life, and in so doing the sin of the Tree of Knowledge is canceled.
Genesis 3:22-24 (NASB)
22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"— 23 therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. 24 So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.
The sacrifice of Christ opened the way to those who believe in Him as Lord and Savior.
Revelation 22:14 (NASB)
14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city.
quote:
Sometimes we in the Calvinist camp are told that the once saved always saved doctrine is false, because it is an incentive to live as you like. Not so. A true believer who is crucified with Christ will not have any desire to live for sinful and worldly pleasures.
I absolutely agree, although I'm not a Calvinist.
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Bloodbought
Advanced Member
Member # 4365
|
posted
Hi again Carol,
Just to clarify,
It was not the case that Adam consumed disbelief when he ate the apple, or that we consume belief when we partake of the Lord’s supper.
Adam was fed with disbelief before he ate the apple or whatever fruit it was. In the same way we must be fed with belief and be partakers of the fruits of the spirit before we share in the Lords supper, which is in remembrance of Him.
quote:
Do you think that 'eating His flesh and drinking His blood' is a way to be crucified with Christ?
When we partake of Christ by believing in Him, we are dead to sin and alive to God.
Romans 6:8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: 9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. 10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Our sinful nature has been crucified with Christ, so that we are dead to sin and no longer attracted to sinful things.
Sometimes we in the Calvinist camp are told that the once saved always saved doctrine is false, because it is an incentive to live as you like. Not so. A true believer who is crucified with Christ will not have any desire to live for sinful and worldly pleasures.
Posts: 822 | From: Ireland | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
Thanks Bloodbought!
That's a very interesting comparison. Adam consumed disbelief when he ate the apple, while we consume belief in Christ when we share in the Lord's Supper.
Do you think that 'eating His flesh and drinking His blood' is a way to be crucified with Christ?
I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.
Galatians 2:20
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Bloodbought
Advanced Member
Member # 4365
|
posted
Hi Carol,
When Adam ate the forbidden fruit it was a sin, not because the fruit was sinful, but because God said not to eat it. Adam fell because he believed the devil and disbelieved God. Adam consumed disbelief and so all mankind from Adam are infected with disbelief. It was by eating that sin entered into man, and it is also by eating that sin is cleansed.
quote:
John 6
53So 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 yourselves. 54“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55“For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.
Jesus was saying that in order to be saved, the disbelief that Adam consumed must be replaced by partaking of Christ's sacrifice on our behalf by faith. We do not consume Christ literally; we consume belief in Him, thereby reversing Adam’s disbelief and transgression. No unbeliever, who doesn’t discern Christ’s sacrifice as the only source of cleansing from sin should partake of the remembrance feast at the Lords table, since they are consuming unbelief and damnation to themselves.
Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Posts: 822 | From: Ireland | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
Why did our Lord Jesus Christ tell us to drink His blood when drinking blood was forbidden under the law?
Leviticus 17
10‘And any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. 11‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement.’ 12“Therefore I said to the sons of Israel, ‘No person among you may eat blood, nor may any alien who sojourns among you eat blood.’ 13“So when any man from the sons of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, in hunting catches a beast or a bird which may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth.
Matthew 26
27And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; 28for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.
John 6
53So 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 yourselves. 54“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55“For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.
I know we don't actually drink His blood, but the fruit of the vine at the Last Supper represents it.
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
