why do christians always talk about[b] flesh[/b] and[b] blood[/b] are they cannibals

As an Idol worshiper, u should ve the answer!

Flesh and blood refers to human beings. But it depends on your context.

Ephesians 6:12
12 For we are not wrestling with flesh and blood [contending only with physical opponents], but against the despotisms, against the powers, against [the master spirits who are] the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spirit forces of wickedness in the heavenly (supernatural) sphere.

why do christians always talk about flesh and blood are they cannibals

What a question exhibiting so much ignorance.

@op
it amuses me when people like you believe the bible JUST ENOUGH to attempt to disprove it.
and then when they fail, they researcht the same bible and believe another part in an attempt to disprove it, and they fail again

PAGAN 9JA:

why do christians always talk about[b] flesh[/b] and[b] blood[/b] are they cannibals

You're getting it wrong. They only like eating the flesh and drinking the blood of a particular person. I guess its an acquired taste.

^^^^

ah ah i see.

CHRISTIAN CANNIBALS

An argument of why Christians are cannibals (and possibly vampires) from Christianity's own perspective

by Jim Walker (an ex-cannibal)

Originated: 07 January 2003
Additions: 10 July 2006


How many Christians realize that when they eat that wafer and drink the wine during communion service that they, in effect, practice cannibalism by the partaking in the eating of human flesh and blood?

I certainly did not know that when I underwent communion in my religious days. It sounds so innocent and benign; "Communion" imparts the concept of sharing thoughts and feelings, or so I thought. Oh how the priests fooled me. They used other obscure terms too, like "Eucharist" and "Sacrament of the Last Supper." At no time did a priest or deacon explain to me that I would share in the communal eating of the human flesh and blood of Jesus.

Cannibal: A person who eats the flesh of human beings.

Since Jesus represents an actual human being, and I ate him, that made me a cannibal. And if you have ever undergone communion, then you too fall into that category.

The Church tricked me and turned me into a cannibal!

Not only did I drink blood and eat flesh, but they made me do it in front of a statue of a bloody corpse hanging by nails on two pieces of lumber, a representation of the human whom I had just eaten. (Imagine eating a hamburger in front of an image of a freshly slain cow.)


[img]http://arthuride.files./2011/02/first-communion1.jpg[/img]

^^^^
The Church indoctrinates cannibalism at an early age. Here we have a priest putting pieces of raw human flesh into the mouths of children.




^^^^
While Popes and priests visit foreign countries, they also make sure to spread their cannibalism.
Did this priest tell this child that she would eat human meat before putting a slice of it into her mouth?



When I discovered the shocking realization that I had eaten human flesh, and drank human blood I felt like vomiting. Where in the world did this morbid practice begin, I wondered. I reread the Bible for clues. Could that explain the mystery of the empty tomb of Jesus (Luke 24:3)? Did the disciples eat him?

Several Christians tried to console me by explaining that Communion only represents the symbolic eating of flesh, not the real thing (I later discovered that many Protestant Christians don't believe in the literal eating of Jesus, although some do). I felt relieved for awhile until other Christians told me otherwise (virtually all Catholics and Episcopalians believe in the literal interpretation). I began to do a bit of research for myself from the Catholic Church's own position. My stomach began to churn again as I discovered what communion and the Eucharist really means.

Communion

Communion, or "Holy Communion" as the Church officially calls it, means the actual reception of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. As the Catholic Encyclopedia puts it, "For real reception of the Blessed Eucharist it is required that the sacred species be received into the stomach. For this alone is the eating referred to by our Lord (John 6:58)."

So you can't just put it in your mouth and spit it out. Oh no. You have to make sure you swallow it into your stomach!

I looked up the Biblical chapter in John 6 and found this diabolical revelation:

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. (John 6:53-55)

Egads, I thought. Jesus really wants them to EAT HIM! It would make perfect sense if the disciples did eat his dead corpse. Of course you wouldn't want to admit your cannibalism to the unbelievers and you'd have to explain the missing body to the authorities. You might say something like, "He is not here, but is risen, " (Luke 24:6). Yeah, right, that's the ticket.




^^^^
If the disciples did eat Christ, it may have looked something like this.


Eucharist

Eucharist describes the name given to the "Blessed Sacrament of the Altar," (older religions also used blood sacrifices to an altar. Some used virgin humans, bulls, lambs, etc.). The Christians use it to mean an actual sacrifice by Jesus where they truly believe the bread and wine turns into the actual corporal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. Christians also use other titles such as, "Table of the Lord" (Mensa Domini) or the morbid term, "Lord's Body" (Corpus Domini).

From the Catholic Church and as far back as the pronouncement from the Council of Trent, the quintessence of the Eucharist means that "the Body and Blood of the God-man ARE truly, really, and substantially present."




^^^^
Here we have a community of Christians lining up to eat and swallow the uncooked flesh of Jesus in what Christianity calls the "Blessed sacrament of the Altar" or better known as the 'Eucharist' during a ceremony of communion. Looks innocent, doesn't it? Not at all the image of cannibalism as usually depicted in folklore.



The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992), stresses the centrality of the Eucharist to Catholic life:

  The Eucharist is 'the source and summit of the Christian life.' The other sacraments, and indeed all ecclesiastical ministries and works of the apostolate, are bound up with the Eucharist and are oriented toward it. For in the Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church, namely Christ himself, or Pasch.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1324


So if you practice Catholicism, and wish to remain a Catholic, you must honor the connubiality of the Eucharist. Not only does it mean eating the flesh and blood of Christ as a sacrifice, it means a union with the gore:

  In the Eucharist the sacrifice of Christ becomes also the sacrifice of the members of his Body. The lives of the faithful, their praise, sufferings, prayer, and work, are united with those of Christ and with his total offering, and so acquire a new value. Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be untied with his offering.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1368


Moreover, you must never deny the priesthoods power of consecrating the flesh and blood:

  If any one shall say that in the New Testament there is no visible and external priesthood nor any power of consecrating and offering the Body and Blood of the Lord, as well as of remitting and retaining sins, but merely the office and bare ministry of preaching the Gospel, let him be anathema.

Council of Trent, No. 961


Note: anathema means cursed, a malediction on your soul.

So how does bread and wine turn into actual flesh, you may ask? The Christians believe it comes from the concept of transubstantiation.

Transubstantiation

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, Hildebert of Tours (~1079) probably first used the term transubstantiation and the Church later adopted the practice in the Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215) and the Council of Lyons (1274), and finally, the Council of Trent (1545-1563).

Transubstantiation basically means, the transition or conversion of one thing into another in some aspect of being. Turning water into wine gives one example of transubstantiation, and turning bread into flesh and wine into blood gives another. Transubstantiation, however, doesn't just describe a simple conversion of one thing into another but a substantial conversion (conversio substantialis). Transubstantiation differs from every other substantial conversion in this, that only the substance gets converted into another.

[Advice to the Church: Before converting the wine into blood, why not also transubstantiate water into wine? No need for expensive grape orchards, harvesting, or processing because Jesus would do the entire conversion for you for free. That way, you could give (or better yet, sell) bottles of wine to your congregations (you could call it "Jesus Juice". You could establish Catholic wineries around the world! Just imagine the new converts you would get and, oh how your coffer cups would overflow. Just a thought.]

In the Eucharist, two extremes of conversions occur, namely the bread and wine as the terminus a quo, and the Body and Blood of Christ as the terminus ad quem (before and after). In other words, the substance of the bread and wine departs in order to make room for the Body and Blood of Christ.

Transubstantiation, as a conversion of the total substance, is the transition of the entire substance of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, comes as the express doctrine of the Church (Council of Trent, Sess. XIII, can. ii).

This theophagy (god eating) of course did not come first from the Catholics but had occurred throughout pagan religions long before Christianity. The notion that eating another living human being lies at the belief of absorbing his nature into his own, thus becoming, in some sense, more godlike, similar to the even more primitive belief that eating one's enemies makes one more powerful.

No true Christian should doubt it. Eating that wafer and drinking the wine in Church actually means truly and really eating human meat and blood. In fact, it's the entire body: eyes, brains, gall bladder, spleen, rectum, joystick, testicles, etc. Everything. If you've ever watched the TV program, Fear Factor, that's nothing compared with eating the components of an entire human body. According to the Council of Trent, if you deny the Transubstantiation, then you are accursed (anathema). You will also get to spend eternity in hell.

Bon appetit!


How does transubstantiation work?

So how does transubstantiation actually work; what process does the Church use to transform bread and wine into human flesh and blood (and guts, etc.)? Apparently this remains a deep Church secret. However, we do know that the priests make verbal incantations, pass smoking incense about, and pray a lot during a rite they call "Offertory" (Offertorium). Apparently the actual transformation occurs during the Prayer of Consecration, by which the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine, and are converted into the flesh and blood of Christ. At just what miraculous moment during the prayer it turns into human flesh, I haven't a clue and I suspect the priests don't either. Apparently Jesus does the actual conversion, but I haven't discovered the method of how the priests know when this occurs or what test procedures they use to insure that Jesus made the transubstantiation (what if Jesus got lazy that day or just decided, enough is enough?).

In any case, by the time the priest places the wafer into your mouth, you can rest assured that you are actually eating Christ's meat. (It tastes like chicken.)

We do know that an industry exists to make the bread and wine. For example, S&M (I kid you not) stands as one of the companies that make official communion bread for the Church:

[img]http://nobeliefs.com/communion/COMUNION.GIF[/img]

If you don't know what S&M means, in colloquial terms it stands for sadomasochism or the practice of sadism (sadistic) and masochism (subjecting oneself to abuse or physical pain).

Now I doubt that this company's name means or intends a connection with sadomasochism, but it seems an appropriate term if you consider what the eating of human flesh means to the recipient or the giver of one's own flesh. I cannot think of another word than sadomasochism to better describe the act of consciously eating the flesh of a human from another person (a sadistic act) who willingly gives them their flesh and blood to eat (an extreme masochist act).

Frankwright Mundy & Co. Ltd. sells communical sets. They even offer briefcases and shoulder bags for carrying around the flesh and blood of Jesus. What next, I wondered; will they one day build fast food outlets where a Christian can get Jesus meat anytime of day? McJesus? Christ-In-A-Box?


[size=16pt]Vampirism[/size]

Not only did I eat human flesh in my communion sacraments, but I also drank the "actual" blood of Jesus. Doesn't this make me a vampire also? Although vampires supposedly suck blood instead of drinking it, this seems an insignificant distinction. On the contrary, the drinking and the whole swallowing of blood as opposed to sucking seems to me a bit more bloodthirsty if you ask me.

If you consider the folklore surrounding vampire stories and compare them with the beliefs of Christianity, the claims appear similar. Vampire myths (see Dracula) and Christianity both believe that by drinking human blood, you will live forever. Actually Christianity goes one step further by requiring the eating of human flesh along with the blood (John 6:53-55). And of course you're also eating the joystick of Jesus (does that make one man-lover, I wonder?) and the small and large intestines of Jesus, and the bladder of Jesus, etc. Only by this cannibalistic act can you achieve "eternal life."

Consider also that vampirism and their drinking of blood and immortality represent fiction, whereas Christians actually believe their communal drinking of blood and eating of Jesus' corpse will earn them eternal life. Doesn't this, at the very least, put Christian vampirism in a more deleterious light than fictional vampirism?

Note that the actual Dracula (not the fictional one) lived as a Christian.  No doubt the real Dracula thoroughly enjoyed his communal ingesting of human blood.


Addiction?

Now I don't know why just one eating of flesh and drinking of blood won't get you to heaven, but I've yet to get a good explanation of why Christians need to eat flesh and blood every week. This continual practice of ritual cannibalism and vampirism brings up even more pressing questions about this gruesome practice. Does the act of communion lead to habitual use or an addictive need for more flesh and blood? Consider that Christians have done more to promote bloody wars throughout history than any other group, and their insistence on evangelizing every human on earth to their faith, should non-believers fear that the Christians might turn them into human flesh eaters too?



^^^^
They start this addiction at the earliest possible age. For the first communion, they actually give a reward for remembering their first cannibalistic act, usually in the form of a certificate. (You'd think the promise of everlasting life would serve as enough reward.) Note that nowhere in the certificate does it say that you've just eaten the human meat of Jesus.




^^^^
Here we have a Christian boy eagerly awaiting his fix of Jesus' flesh. (Note the extra large portion.)




^^^^
Christian Cannibalism and vampirism continues into elderly life.
How many glasses of Christ's blood has this woman drank over the years?


Another concern involves the length of time of transubstantiated bread and wine. Just how long does this conversion last? We now know that you must swallow it for its effect to work, but at what stage does it turn back into naturally digested bread and wine? Does it remain transubstantiated even after digestion? Does it ever reconvert? If not, consider what this means as we move our bowels. Should we not treat the remains of Christ as sacred, just as we do the remains of the bodies of dead saints? Perhaps we might consider a better form of elimination of the excrement made from our Redeemer than just thoughtlessly flushing Him down the toilet.

I find the practice of sacred cannibalism disturbing and potentially life threatening, regardless of how many of the addicted faithful tell us it will give us everlasting life. I humbly make the following proposal: that the FDA and the CDC get involved in the study of the composition of the Transubstantiated bread and wine and the narcotic or addictive effects they may impose on the human body.

I hope that I have alarmed you enough to contact your local law enforcement office and state representative about this pressing matter. If you and I don't do it, who will?



Conclusion

Even if you still stubbornly cling to the belief that the Eucharist represents only a symbol of eating flesh and drinking blood, that still makes you a cannibal, if only a symbolic cannibal. If you partake in communion as a metaphorical representation of eating Christ's body, then that still makes you a metaphorical cannibal. You simply have no easy out of this predicament as a symbolic cannibal sits as a subset of cannibalism.

You might also want to question the metaphorical or symbolic stance because if the Eucharist presents metaphor, then what does that say for Jesus himself and what Jesus directly says from the Bible about eating his meat? Metaphorical also? How do you distinguish between metaphor and reality in the Bible when it treats all doctrines equally as the inspired words of God? Would you object to the title of Symbolic Christian or Metaphorical Christian? If you consider yourself a metaphorical or symbolic Christian, then you still fall under the label of Christian just as a symbolic cannibal falls under the label of cannibal.
There simply exists no way out for a Christian to escape the cannibal label, except of course to exit Christianity entirely. I did just that and by doing so, I escaped cannibalism along with all the other nonsense. I wrote this article as satire but if you live as one of the millions of faithful that believe in the Bible and the doctrines of Christianity then you must take this article as a serious argument.

[size=32pt]APART FROM DESTROYING THE HUMAN SPECIES, YOU XTIANS EAT YOUR GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/size]


*disgusted

I've also wondered about it myself. I mean, it's bad enough that all the oxen,goats and other farm animals were almost rendered extinct through endless bloody sacrifices to appease to lawd but it seems that wasn't enough. The lawd wanted more blood. . .HUMAN BLOOD! ! !

Abraham was inches away from sacrificing his only son (i can imagine the poor boy tied up like a cow with his bearded dad putting a sharp knife to his throat. . .only a "loving" god is capable of putting you through that as a sign of faith). Some guy (can't remember his name now) offered his daughter as a sacrifice to the lawd if he succeeded in defeating his enemies. Even the lawd himself sacrificed his only begotten son (Er, they never mentioned when intercourse took place) by sending him down to earth to be sacrificed for the sins of mankind (which by the way was a product of his gross incompetence and lack of foresight). Finally, you can't rule out CANNIBALISM! ! ! After all, Jesus encouraged his disciples to eat his flesh and drink his blood!

the blood of jesus speaketh better things than that of Abel

toba:

the blood of jesus speaketh better things than that of Abel

Here we go again with more blood talk. Why do Christians love blood so much? In between, where in the bible did you get that quote from?

harakiri:

Here we go again with more blood talk. Why do Christians love blood so much? In between, where in the bible did you get that quote from?

smdh. as an ex christian, u ought to know where that is now. Most atheists here on Nl says they know the bible more than the theists. anyway. here it is

You have come to Jesus, the one who mediates the new covenant between God and people, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks of forgiveness instead of crying out for vengeance like the blood of Abel. Heb 12 vs 24

[size=13pt]^{Jesus is quoted many times in the Bible saying that a believer can ask for anything through prayer and receive it. He even goes so far as to say that mountains and trees can be thrown into the sea simply by praying for it . This is clearly a lie , and can be proven to be a lie by any believer. Simply pray for me to be converted to Christianity right away. Or better yet ask God to move the mountains behind my house. He could make a lot of converts that way. If I’m converted today, I’ll post a public apology on this same thread and devote my life to kissing God’s assss . If I’m not converted it would only be fair for you to apologize and devote your life to kissing my butttt .}[/size]

toba:

smdh. as an ex christian, u ought to know where that is now. Most atheists here on Nl says they know the bible more than the theists. anyway. here it is

You have come to Jesus, the one who mediates the new covenant between God and people, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks of forgiveness instead of crying out for vengeance like the blood of Abel. Heb 12 vs 24

Please pardon me. I haven't been reading my bible regularly and neither have i been receiving Sunday-Sunday brainwashing sessions so i might not be able to remember EVERY chapter and verse in the bible like you do. Jesus speaks of forgiveness and yet, he has condemned billions of sinners to hell. I wonder what will happen to those Buddhists,Taoists,Moslems etc who are neither Christians and neither have they heard of this "loving god" who loves them so much that he has an eternal furnace prepared for them all because of his incompetence and lack of foresight. What will be their fate? They'll burn in hell for eternity for what they do not know?

What a loving god he really is.

From http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/flying-spaghetti-monster-invisible-pink-unicorns-et-al-part-1-4

Many atheists exhibit a lack of knowledge of the very theism against which they most often, if not exclusively, argue - the Bible's Judeo-Christianity. Worse yet, they think that they are well versed by claiming that they were "raised Christian" (whatever that means), "went to Sunday School," "was an altar boy," "saw the movie (hyperbole intended)," etc.

I am not one to claim that you must be a theologian to speak on, or against, Christianity nor a scholar to speak on, or against, the Bible. That is to be reserved for scholarly settings. Yet, one ought to be at least somewhat versed on the subject that one seeks to critique and be skeptical enough to double check both what one is being told as well as one's own positions.

I find that many atheists not only lack knowledge of Christian theology and the contents and contexts of the Bible but lack a basic understanding of natural theology / general revelation, which seeks to infer the cause of the universe from nature (nature not meaning biosphere alone but the universe as a whole).

Take a lack of knowledge of natural theology / general revelation - add to it a lack {of} knowledge of Christian theology and the contents of the Bible - mix that with a typically early age rejection of Christianity - blend it with the early, Sunday School, age understanding of theology - and finally bake it in the presuppositional oven of self-professed erudition and what do we end up with? . . . .

toba:

the blood of jesus speaketh better things than that of Abel

harakiri:

Here we go again with more blood talk. Why do Christians love blood so much? In between, where in the bible did you get that quote from?

I just want to know why this 21st century negro is writing in early modern english from the 15th century. The blood might speaketh but the sh#t stinketh.

Martian:

I just want to know why this 21st century negro is writing in early modern english from the 15th century. The blood might speaketh but the sh#t stinketh.

of cos. since u have used the blood, thats how u know it 'stinketh' right?

toba:

of cos. since u have used the blood, thats how u know it 'stinketh' right?

Used the blood? Common man, unlike you I don't speaketh to blood but when I dropeth a dookie, i thus declareth that the sh#t sure does stinketh. Also, if I did believeth in a god, I wouldn't want to speaketh to his blood. Nor would i partaketh in a ritual that promoteth and signifies cannibalism.

Thou shalt continue with thy christian figurative cannibalism and leaveth me out of the discussion hence forth. Thus spake the Lord of Hosts.

I think this holy communion thing is a vestige of a very ancient belief that you can acquire someone's powers by eating his flesh and drinking his blood.  There is archeological evidence of this in the mayian civilisation in south America.  There was even some sort of it recently during the civil war in Liberia.  So, christians subconciously think they are acqiuring some of Jesus's powers by eating his flesh!!!.  Another evidence that christianity borrowed from religions that came before it. Shame!!!!

Martian:

Used the blood? Common man, unlike you I don't speaketh to blood but when I dropeth a dookie, i thus declareth that the sh#t sure does stinketh. Also, if I did believeth in a god, I wouldn't want to speaketh to his blood. Nor would i partaketh in a ritual that promoteth and signifies cannibalism.

Thou shalt continue with thy christian figurative cannibalism and leaveth me out of the discussion hence forth. Thus spake the Lord of Hosts.

this is BS and irrelevant. I've asked u  how u came about knowing the blood stinketh and not the epistle u posted above. Obviously u ve got no answer right?

  What a question exhibiting so much ignorance.

I knew this question does not wort to be answered.
He knows the answer.

Sickos everywhere,what an ignorant talk.

[size=13pt]^{If Christians Told The Truth About The Bible . . .when it comes to serious conversation like this , that's when the Christians showing their ignorance . at least learn how to share what u know to proof You , Your Bible and the GOD u are serving all these years now .} [/size]

Learn what? by accepting that we are cannibals or too explain we are not? Not all question desarve to be answer.

[size=13pt]<sup>John 14:12 states a follower in Jesus can perform any of his works and do it even greater.  If you continue to insist I believe in Jesus, it is only fair I may ask of you to show just how strong your faith is   . After all, you would be my “mentor” in Christ .  

I’m not a believer as of yet, but surely you are.  Would you mind perhaps resurrecting a dead relative or walking on water? plappville  i am talking to u</sup>  [/size]

[size=13pt]<sup>Okay plappville dear Christian believer obviously you didn’t do what i asked u on my previous post and backed out with the “this is metaphorical” excuse . Surely you can try Mark 16:17-1 8 which says believers can drink “any deadly thing” and “it shall not hurt” them .

But I don’t think you would be naive enough to drink any arsenic offered . Perhaps I’m wrong and you would be willing to test the Book’s veracity-”lay it on the line” so to speak?</sup> [/size]