The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> Re: Those Convenient Metaphors

Re: Those Convenient Metaphors
Posted by AssyrianMuslim (Guest) - Friday, June 13 2008, 6:14:59 (CEST)
from 74.128.146.151 - 74-128-146-151.dhcp.insightbb.com Commercial - Windows Codename Longhorn - Mozilla
Website:
Website title:

That "metaphor" game isn't going to work all the time. There are things which are literal and there are metaphors but they are obvious and do not need some special or secret interpretation that not everyone can understand. If Jesus would have for example made the statement about eating and drinking his body but would have left it at that, a slick Mini would probably have a valid claim but that was not the case. Three out of four Gospels mention the Eucharist and in all of them Jesus is recorded to have taken bread and broken it up into pieces. He also shared the cup of wine. The bread is supposed to be his flesh and the wine is supposed to be his blood which he supposedly poured out for the sins of Minime, Jumblat, Bush or any other Christian. The verses are very clear and there is nothing secretive about it nor a misunderstanding. Jesus either said it, or he never made the statements in first place but what is recorded in those Gospels is not a secret nor just a metaphor. They are plain and clear and the world of Christendom has been practicing this article of faith for almost 2,000 years now.

Some Christians may very well be embarrassed by this and even object to it but they would be going against their own "word of God". The attempt to pretend that the Eucharist has been misunderstood and is just a metaphor is not going to work at all because the verses are detailed and clear. What Mini is doing is no different from the average pastor or priest who will conveniently pick and chose from his scripture as he pleases. When the death of Jesus is mentioned as the "key" for salvation, every Christian makes sure to take this literal. But when death, sword, fire or anything else is mentioned elsewhere else, they make sure to avoid it and call it symbolic. In reality such Christians have no respect for their own books yet demand apologies from others when we say something about it. Jumblat wasn't pleased by my apology to him for using a foul word but demanded an apology to his "prince of peace" even though I said nothing false nor did I slander him in anyway. When I mentioned Jesus denying to have come to bring peace on earth, the immediate response was that it is a parable or a metaphor but when Jesus is called "lamb of God" and other names, they are taken literal.

It is exactly as our brother Pancho mentioned and that is that they are picking and choosing what to take literal and what to take as a metaphor. But all one has to do is ask any priest or any Orthodox Christian about the Eucharist, and the answer will be clear. We further have 3 Gospels which give us the "proof" for it and they are not metaphors because it is recorded that Jesus took bread and wine and demanded his disciples to eat it as his flesh and blood. It is clear when we read the entire verses in context. There is no need to lie and say that Christians have got it all misunderstood and that they are wrong. Either the verses are not valid to begin with or they are true and correct.



---------------------


The full topic:



Content-length: 3293
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept: text/xml,application/xml,application/xhtml+xml,text/html;q=0.9,text/plain;q=0.8,image/png,*/*;q=0.5
Accept-charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7
Accept-encoding: gzip,deflate
Accept-language: en-us,en;q=0.5
Connection: keep-alive
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Keep-alive: 300
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf5/rkvsf_core.php?Those_Convenient_Metaphors-BHMN.GRet.REPLY
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.14) Gecko/20080404 Firefox/2.0.0.14



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9