Gospel of Matthew Truth

[Anonymous No.18784763]

>While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”
>Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

Well, /lit/, what does the atheist and gnostic non-dualist say to this?

[Anonymous No.18784771]

>>18784763
Wow! A repost!

[Anonymous No.18784827]

>>18784771
I just went to sleep and could not reply, sorry.

[Anonymous No.18784896]

>>18784827
Then I will rewrite my answer.
An atheist would probably not care about what you just posted.
A gnostic would criticize Matthew for taking things too literally.

[Anonymous No.18785534]

>>18784896
>An atheist would probably not care about what you just posted.
Why not though? Doesn't it show the wrongness of their views?

[Anonymous No.18786230]

>>18784763
I thought the gnostics were dualists?

[Anonymous No.18786238]

>>18786230
>I thought the gnostics were dualists?
They were chickens, as if theyd ever fight fair 1v1. Gnostics only do sneak attacks.

[Anonymous No.18786534]

>>18786238
This. They got destroyed at every council when they couldn't spread their lies in the shadows

[Anonymous No.18786561]

>>18784763
you made me interested in non-dualism, maybe I will give Guenon a try

[Anonymous No.18786576]

>>18784763
get a job

[Anonymous No.18786674]

>>18784763
Obvious Sauline insertions.
Failure to analyse Jewish thanks giving adequately.
Obvious insertion of pagan sacrifice rituals.
Failure to talk about the law's fulfillment in its honouring, or the capacity of people to come to the law to their ability. [again obvious Sauline insertion].

Around Roman Secret Policemen never relax.

[Anonymous No.18786682]

>>18784763

If it is for the forgiveness of sins then why would he drink it at all?

[Anonymous No.18786711]

>>18784763
>>18786682

Also, if the "true presence" and such is achieved and is effective BEFORE his execution, as this excerpt claims, then why would it even be necessary for him to die at all? Catholics and reading: blood enemies.

[Anonymous No.18786770]

>>18786711
>why would it even be necessary for him to die at all
To pave the way for the human nature to defeat death and be resurrected.
Also because the last supper is Christ offering Himself as a sacrifice. Here he offers (dedicates) the gifts of His Body and Blood as a sacrifice, and then proceeds to make this sacrfice for us at the cross.

[Anonymous No.18786790]

>>18786674
>Obvious Sauline insertions.
>Failure to analyse Jewish thanks giving adequately.
>Obvious insertion of pagan sacrifice rituals.
>Failure to talk about the law's fulfillment in its honouring, or the capacity of people to come to the law to their ability. [again obvious Sauline insertion].

I wonder who could be behind this post

[Anonymous No.18786806]

>>18786770

Then the first mention of the Eucharist is totally metaphorical.

[Anonymous No.18786809]

>>18786790
Why were there no women at the friday dinner eh? Where was Jesus' wife?

[Anonymous No.18786960]

>>18786806
>Then
It doesn't logically follow. Christ has the power to make wine into His blood, which exists and can remit sins even before the sacrifice on the cross.
>totally metaphorical
The Jews certaintly did not think so.

>But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
>Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

Christs uses the verb ἔφαγον to mean "eat", which is very literal and has connotations like "devour" in English.

[Anonymous No.18786971]

>>18786960
>can't spot a gay orgy despite obvious textual cues.

[Anonymous No.18786980]

>>18786809
Because the apostles were not chosen to be women.
>Where was Jesus' wife?
She (the Church) would be born later at Pentecost.

[Anonymous No.18786986]

>>18786960

Then it is totally unnecessary for him to die.

[Anonymous No.18787035]

>>18786986
It is necessary for Christ to descend into Hades and free the many rightheous souls (like Adam, Eve, Abel, David, etc) who have been waiting for Christ in there, and to destroy Satan's dominion over death by experiencing death Himself as the Logos.

[Anonymous No.18787043]

>>18787035

Could that not have likewise been done without actually doing it, per your interpretation: >>18786960

[Anonymous No.18787693]

>>18787043
>without actually doing it
?
Christ did actually give them His blood to drink though.

Christ had to really die, not metaphorically, because we die as human die really and not metaphorically. He had to undergo death the same as we do in order to "fix" it from within, so to speak.

[Anonymous No.18787740]

>>18787693
Wouldn't God have the power to fix it from without, so to speak?

[Anonymous No.18787773]

>>18787693
>did actually give them His blood to drink

Yes, without dying, in contrast to Judaic animal sacrifices wherein the animal dies, so presumably, the other deeds pertaining to death could have likewise been performed without actually dying. Unless, of course, you want to concede that the initial excerpt is strictly metaphoric, and stand in opposition to Catholic and Orthodox Tradition. Or concede that all the deeds could have been performed without dying, and likewise stand in opposition to Catholic and Orthodox Tradition. Or, alternatively, affirm Catholic and Orthodox Tradition of picking and choosing and mixing and matching at the expense of the Logical coherence of the very text that they claim to be based on. Quite the conundrum.

[Anonymous No.18787863]

>>18787740
We aren't mere spirits, but physical creatures with flesh. Human nature has fallen, and we as humans cannot get sanctified without participating in Christ's divinity. Christ assumed flesh so that we as humans may fully share in His divinity and get sanctified in all of our human being.

>>18787773
>Yes, without dying
He offers His body and blood as a gift and then goes on to suffer and die on the cross, fulfilling this sacrifice. Exactly like how one would offer an animal as a gift to God to be sacrificed by priests. His blood has the inherent power of bringing us into communion with His divinity (even before Christ dies).
>all the deeds could have been performed without dying
Our salvation could not be performed without Christ dying. Giving the apostles His blood to drink is only a part of Christ's greater salvific work.

[Anonymous No.18787885]

>>18787863
>He offers...

Clearly not understanding the implications: >>18786986

[N E M O . !!GgBWHLRiayD No.18788042]

The Cross extends throughout all of divine substance, including that of the soul; the breadgrains of one's life, and the thin rain of one's solace, are metagenerated by the Cross of one's soul, in syncord with Christ.

[Anonymous No.18788175]

>>18787885
Why? I don't seem to understand your logic.

[Anonymous No.18788520]

>>18786960
It still doesn't sound like they were fully convinced of his edibleness either.

[Anonymous No.18789352]

>>18784763
>Schizo rabbi makes an allegory about cying for his followers before getting BTFO by kikes and romans
This is supposed to convince me of what exactly?