10 ай бұрын
10 ай бұрын
11 ай бұрын
Жыл бұрын
Жыл бұрын
Жыл бұрын
Жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
Пікірлер
@codybrown3326 Ай бұрын
What image is 95?
@ranesplayground Ай бұрын
Hi Larry, You mention church in your video and talk as a follower of Christ, but I’m still left curious . I’ll explain myself a little first.
Through your creation and my study (it never feels like study on wikipedia and the tangents it offers though) I've come to the conclusion there must be a creator, one that has manifested itself in many forms to suit the present time and the will of the people, throughout the ages, around the whole world. From the study your creation has offered I've come to theorise evolutions plan is unveiling itself slowly, through creatures following impulse, creating things and coming together to celebrate successes, with something else that's essential but feels harsh testing these things to failure with the intention of discovering the next best thing. It's scary because it implies everything that has brought existence to this point today is happening for a reason, which feels like part of a greater plan that seemingly is aiming for a right good old time. This thinking is leading me to see my own purpose. I'm not sure what to think about these thoughts, but I'm enjoying exploring them serendipitously, following my own impulses to research, and I must say thanks to you for creating. Thank you. Today your creations led me to feel encouraged to rise early by Lorenzo de medici (much needed), amongst other thoughts. By following one of these strings that come from stringy thoughts, I wanted to know if the creator of one of my most valued sources for study believed in a higher being, and then I found the article on wikipedia, about wikipedia and then I came to yourself and this video, which i jumped at when i saw the theme. Though I'm afraid to ask because it's weird and i wish it was private, it seems as though you somehow see these and respond! Which is crrrrazy. So here I am refining my urge for knowledge to two questions, if you feel comfortable answering them. Do you have faith in a creator? And if so, do you recognise what you contributed to is perhaps part of a greater plan, one that has come from our creator?
My understanding of the video, is that the flesh he refers to is spiritual, it’s in this realm of reality, the same one i use right now to convey my thoughts to you by wiggling my fingers (weird eh) that our creator manifests itself primarily. Much like protein, it is a network of connections that form a being that moves and sways in the reality actual bread exists in, I believe the Eucharist is a ritual, like singing together and lots of other rituals, it's a way for this flesh to move and sway, to become. Your creations (including the video i suppose) and it’s data regarding the world that preceded me helps me learn the relationship between these two realms of reality, so again, thank you. I hope to not offend you, (clearly i should take more notes from our medici hey haha) thanks.
@ranesplayground Ай бұрын
I am Ian by the way, nice to meat you
@LarrySanger Ай бұрын
@@ranesplayground I do indeed believe that God exists and moreover, more importantly, I have faith-loyalty, trust, adherence-in God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. I refound my belief in 2020 when I first read the Bible for the first time for good understanding. Soon I’ll tell the story on my blog. I’m also 500+ pages into writing a philosophical case for the existence of the Christian God. As to your question, I think God does make use of us despite ourselves to his greater glory, which means, because he is the God of life, the emergence of greater and greater life. I have sometimes hoped that the Lord used my work on Wikipedia for good-on balance-despite it having been twisted in so many ways. If so, indeed, then soli Deo gloria.
@Ma1q444 21 күн бұрын
@@LarrySangerGod Bless You Larry
@ani3012 2 ай бұрын
13:02:10
@ericchan4887 2 ай бұрын
Sssssssssyyyyyyyyyyy
@ericchan4887 2 ай бұрын
🐟🐟🐟🐟🐟🪼🪼🪼🪼🦐🐟🦈
@DanilDRW 3 ай бұрын
larry sanger wikipedia is stalking me please help me
@PleasurableLearning 3 ай бұрын
Hi, just to let you know that I reacted to this video with a meticulous analysis kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nr90nKuox9mZpXU.html
@noahgaming8833 4 ай бұрын
Are we to understand that Christ had just commanded his disciples to eat his flesh, then said their doing so would be pointless? Is that what “the flesh is of no avail” means? “Eat my flesh, but you’ll find it’s a waste of time”-is that what he was saying? Hardly. The fact is that Christ’s flesh avails much! If it profits us nothing, so that the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ are of no avail, then “your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished” (1 Cor. 15:17b-18). In John 6:63 “flesh profits nothing” refers to mankind’s inclination to think using only what their natural human reason would tell them rather than what God would tell them. Thus in John 8:15-16 Jesus tells his opponents: “You judge according to the flesh, I judge no one. Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone that judge, but I and he who sent me.” So natural human judgment, unaided by God’s grace, is unreliable; but God’s judgment is always true. Also in John 6:63, “The words I have spoken to you are spirit” does not mean “What I have just said is symbolic.” The word “spirit” is never used that way in the Bible. The line means that what Christ has said will be understood only through faith; only by the power of the Spirit and the drawing of the Father (cf. John 6:37, 44-45, 65).
@noahgaming8833 4 ай бұрын
Okay. So I’d say several things here. The first one is, we do recognize that Jesus sometimes speaks literally and sometimes speaks symbolically, or figuratively. And we have to be sensitive and discerning to figure out which is the case in any particular instance. Fortunately, there are some tests we can use. One of the tests we can use is, “Would this lead to horrible, horrible, horrible consequences?” If we took the Matthew passage literally, about how you should cut out, literally cut out your eye, cut off your hand if they lead you to sin, well, guess what? That happens to everybody. And so everybody would have to gouge out their-not just their right eye, but their left one too-cause they just switch over to using their other eye-and they not only have to cut off their right hand, but their left hand too-because they’d just switch over to using their left hand to sin. So everybody would end up blind and handless. And we have a pretty good idea that that’s not what God means for mankind, because He was the one that made us with eyes and hands in the first place. So we have a pretty good idea that God wants us to have eyes and hands, they’re certainly very useful so our experience bears that out, and that gives us reason to think that Jesus is using figurative language here, and specifically that he’s using a figure known as hyperbole, which is exaggeration to make a point. Hyperbole’s very common in the Bible, it’s a common feature of human speech, but in particular of Biblical idiom. The language in the Bible frequently uses hyperbole, and so we’ve got good reason to think that that’s what Jesus is doing here. So let’s jump over to John 6, with the “My flesh is true meat, my blood is true drink,” and so on. Why would we want to take that literally versus symbolically? Well, there are a number of reasons. One of them is right there in John 6, because some people balk at what Jesus is saying, and they say, “Well, this is a hard saying. Who can hear this?” And Jesus insists that what He’s saying is the case. He repeats it. Actually, He repeats His teaching several times, and John therefore, in John 6:66, tells us that many of His disciples no longer followed Him. Jesus was willing to lose disciples rather than say, “Oh come on, guys, this is just symbolic.” So that’s one reason. He’s even willing to lose the core disciples, because He turns to them and says “Do you also want to go away?” And Peter says, “Well, Lord, you have the words of Eternal Life, so we’re gonna trust you on this one.” But Jesus is willing to lose even the core disciples over this, rather than do what He did on other occasions, which was clarify, like when they misunderstood about the leaven of the Pharisees, and they thought He was talking about some actual bread, He said, “Come on guys, I’m talking about their doctrine.” So He clarified that teaching for them. And in fact, Jesus spoke in parables frequently, but one of the things that we’re told, for example in Mark, is that Jesus clarified the parables for the disciples in private. Well, that’s not what He does here. Instead of clarifying this for the disciples in private, like a parable, He draws a line in the sand and is willing to see them go, too. And so that’s a good indication that this isn’t a parable; this is something that, He’s really serious about this. This is literal. Also, this isn’t the only place in the New Testament where we have this. This crops up in the Synoptic Gospels, in all three of them, and in 1 Corinthians, where Paul is emphatic about the fact that participating in the Eucharist is participating in the Body and Blood of Christ, and if you profane it, you can even die. So Paul’s very serious about this, takes it very seriously; we can then broaden out further, and look at how early Christians interpreted this. Like St. Ignatius of Antioch, at the very beginning of the second century, who interprets this, again, literally. And if you want to read about that, and what other early Christians said about it, you can go to Catholic answers church fathers on the real presence, where we have a whole tract on what the fathers said about this, or you could get the book “The Fathers Know Best,” which also contains that information. So we’ve got a bunch of converging lines of evidence saying “John 6 on this? Literal. Matthew 5 about plucking out your eye and cutting off your hand? Not so literal.”
@noahgaming8833 4 ай бұрын
The charge of cannibalism is not new. Roman pagans called early Church Christians cannibals precisely because the disciples spoke of eating and drinking their God. In doing so, the pagans provide further evidence that belief in the Real Presence of the Eucharist is an ancient Christian doctrine, and that the first Christians understood Jesus to be speaking literally when he established at the Last Supper the ritual we have come to call the Mass. Yet the charge of cannibalism is misplaced. Cannibalism, simply put, is the eating of human flesh, typically after a person has died. A corpse (dead body) is usually present, or at least a dead body part. Second, the quantity of the flesh diminishes as it is being consumed. Third, digesting flesh results in physical nourishment, protein included. In the banquet of the Eucharist, however, Jesus is not dead but is a living sacrifice. Second, his substance is not diminished by consuming the Eucharist. To the contrary, Jesus is bodily in heaven, seated at the right hand of the Father, though his body becomes miraculously present wherever the Eucharist is celebrated. Third, the eating of his Body and Blood does not result in practical physical nourishment on a natural level, although some have miraculously subsisted solely on the Eucharist. The purpose of the Eucharist is to provide spiritual nourishment. In summary, cannibals consume the flesh of a dead person in a way that diminishes and profanes the corpse. Through the sacrament of the Eucharist, Jesus freely gives himself to us; and we consume his living body, blood, soul, and divinity in a way that mysteriously and miraculously does not diminish him but instead enhances our spiritual life.
@noahgaming8833 4 ай бұрын
First, any divine command that comes later modifies divine commands that came earlier. When Jesus declared all foods clean (Mk 7:19), his command superseded the earlier command that certain foods be regarded as unclean (Lv 11:1-8). If Jesus today commands us to drink his blood, his command supersedes any prior command concerning drinking blood. Second, the command against drinking blood, like all of the Old Testament dietary regulations, has passed away, for “These are only a shadow of what is to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink” (Col 2:17, 16). The mention of not eating blood in Acts 15:20, 29 was a pastoral provision suggested by James to keep Jews from being scandalized by the conduct of Gentile Christians. We know that these pastoral provisions were only temporary. One concerned abstaining from idol meat, yet later Paul says eating idol meat is okay so long as it doesn’t scandalize others (Rom 14:1-14, 1 Cor 8:1-13). If it is objected that blood is not a food (though it is in some cultures), note that Jesus was asked (Mk 7:5) why his disciples ate with unwashed hands. He replied, “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him unclean? For it doesn’t go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body” (7:18-19). In context this refers to a non-food substance (the dirt on one’s unwashed hands). Third, the Old Testament is very specific about why one was not to eat blood: “The life of every creature is the blood of it; therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood” (Lv 17:14, cf. Dt 12:23). The Israelites could not eat animal blood because it contained the animal’s life, but there is one Person whose life you must have in you, “Christ who is your life” (Col 3:4).
@noahgaming8833 4 ай бұрын
Fundamentalist writers who comment on John 6 also assert that one can show Christ was speaking only metaphorically by comparing verses like John 10:9 (“I am the door”) and John 15:1 (“I am the true vine”). The problem is that there is not a connection to John 6:35, “I am the bread of life.” “I am the door” and “I am the vine” make sense as metaphors because Christ is like a door-we go to heaven through him-and he is also like a vine-we get our spiritual sap through him. But Christ takes John 6:35 far beyond symbolism by saying, “For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed” (John 6:55). He continues: “As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me” (John 6:57). The Greek word used for “eats” (trogon) is very blunt and has the sense of “chewing” or “gnawing.” This is not the language of metaphor.
@noahgaming8833 4 ай бұрын
Paul actually affirms the sacrificial nature of the Lord’s Supper, conveying that the “cup we bless” is “a participation in the blood of Christ” and “the bread which we break” is “a participation in the body of Christ” (1 Cor. 10:16). He adds that Christians are united because “we all partake of the one bread” (1 Cor. 10:17). In the next chapter, Paul recalls Jesus’ words of remembrance, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood (1 Cor. 11:23-26; Luke 22:20). This is unmistakably sacrificial language, which recalls the words and actions of Moses in sealing the Old Covenant (Exod. 24:6-8).
@contraheresy 4 ай бұрын
Not just Catholics and Orthodox who affirm the Real Presence dopey boomer.
@JeP-lz4ti 4 ай бұрын
Christ's body and blood is in the Eucharist, but John 6 specifically is speaking about belief. It is not literal in this context, as Jesus clearly uses symbolism throughout the whole chapter. However, we can see throughout the whole New Testament that the Eucharist is really His body and blood. "Is means is."
@LarrySanger 4 ай бұрын
It doesn’t taste like meat or blood. The Jerusalem Council said we are not to drink blood. He says to his disciples after repudiating the Jews in John 6, “It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing.” So what’s this you were saying about “is”? Anyway, none of this responds directly to anything I said in the video. 🤷♂️
@JeP-lz4ti 4 ай бұрын
@@LarrySanger I was rebutting your description. Lutherans reject transubstantiation. I suggest you look into the Lutheran confessions. Transubstantiation is a Catholic doctrine, not Orthodox or Protestant. Lutherans do not pretend to know how it works, but that it is supernatural. You seemed to have used John 6 to try and explain what it isn't. However, I will tell you is that it is nourishment for your faith, and God's promise is within the sacraments. Even Calvinists (Presbyterians) hold to a real presence as well as some confessional Baptists. "Is means is" references Matthew 26:26-28.
@JeP-lz4ti 4 ай бұрын
@@LarrySanger I just finished the video. You didn't go into much detail on your personal belief, but your view sounded a lot like the Reformed view. Is it not?
@bibleman8010 4 ай бұрын
St. Jerome writing to Paulinus in 394 said"Everyone knows that trades like farming, building, engineering and carpentry, all need apprenticeship. But when it comes to the trade of interpreting the Word of God ---- well, any talkative old granny, any old fellow in his dotage, any frothy intellectual will blithely dissect and expound it without bothering to take any lessons in it .... This is a childish way of going on, this is circus stuff, to set up as master in your own ignorance. Aye, to let my spleen speak ("ut cum stomacho loquar"), it means that you don't even know what you don't know🤦♀🤦♀
@bibleman8010 4 ай бұрын
St Ignatius is a holy and blessed martyr for the gospel. St Peter himself appointed Ignatius as bishop of Antioch. The Church of Antioch was a well-established stronghold of the gospel and firmly ground in apostolic teaching. So was St Ignatius a member of your true church? No, he was a DECLARED CATHOLIC who stood up for the Divinity of Christ and for the Real Presence of the Body & Blood of Christ in the Eucharist. I'll stick with the authority of the successors of the apostles. The Docetists taught that when St John wrote "the word became flesh," he was speaking figuratively. St Ignatius maintains true apostolic teaching on the flesh of Christ & even offered his own flesh in holy martyrdom. Like you, the Docetists denied that the Eucharistic elements were the flesh & blood of Christ. Who are you? Did you sit at the feet of St John & hear the gospel from his lips? Do you really believe that you know what John's words meant better than Ignatius his pupil? St Ignatius was appointed bishop of Antioch while St Paul was still alive, so when he writes, he confirms the belief that the Eucharistic elements are the very Flesh which suffered for our sins. He opens up the gospel of John to us and shows us the depth of the teaching of St John, who taught Ignatius the faith. In Ignatius' letter to the Church in Smyrna, he defends apostolic teaching against the Docetist heresy which taught that Christ's human body was an illusion. "there isn't anything about the "real presence" of Christ in the Last Supper" - you claim that it is simply a memorial? In the greek translation of the Old testament, in (Leviticus 24:7) & (Numbers 10:10) , the same greek word is used as in (Luke 22:19 & 1 Corinthians 11:24-25) for "remembrance" (anamnésis). And it doesn't simply mean to remember; it refers to the memorial offering of sacrifice, a memorial offering to God. (Leviticus 24:7) "And you shall put pure frankincense on each row, that it may be on the bread for a memorial, even an offering made by fire to the LORD." (Numbers 10:10) "Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in the beginnings of your months, ye shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; that they may be to you for a memorial before your God: I am the LORD your God." And according to Jesus in Luke 22:19-20, the bread that is now become his body (his real PRESENCE) and the wine that is now become His blood is to be a memorial sacrificial meal for the New Covenant for the forgiveness sins. Matthew 26:26-28: Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is my body." And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant,which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" Remember the two disciples"On the road to Emmaus'? The two disciples saw Christ literally, yet they did not recognize Him since Christ appeared under a different form (hint, hint) - and it wasn't until Christ took bread, gave thanks, broke it and gave it to them that [their eyes were opened] [and they recognized him]! Then in [Luke 24:35] it says they told the story of how they [recognized Jesus] [WHEN] [HE BROKE THE BREAD]. (NOTE: the same word for "breaking of the bread" in Luke 24:35 (when they recognized Jesus) is the same word used in Acts 2:24). In John 6 Jesus said, ""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 you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me." St. Paul also speaks about the reality of Jesus' body and blood in the Eucharist, in 1 Corinthians 11:26-27: "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself." 1 Corinthians 10:16-21, Paul says the following: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Consider the people of Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar? What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons." THE EMMAUS EXPERIENCE : LUKE 24:30-31 " While they were talking and discussing together, Jesus himself drew near and went with them. But their eyes were kept from recognizing him. And he said to them, "What is this conversation which you are holding with each other as you walk?" And they stood still, looking sad. Then one of them, named Cle'opas, answered him, "Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?" And he said to them, "What things?" And they said to him, "Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, and how our chief priests and rulers delivered him up to be condemned to death, and crucified him. But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since this happened. Moreover, some women of our company amazed us. They were at the tomb early in the morning and did not find his body; and they came back saying that they had even seen a vision of angels, who said that he was alive. Some of those who were with us went to the tomb, and found it just as the women had said; but him they did not see." And he said to them, "O foolish men, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?" And beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. So they drew near to the village to which they were going. He appeared to be going further, but they constrained him, saying, "Stay with us, for it is toward evening and the day is now far spent." So he went in to stay with them. When he was at table with them, he took the bread and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them. And their eyes were opened and they recognized him; and he vanished out of their sight.( Luke 24:15-31) Boy, there is so much to learn from this great passage of Scripture. But let's concentrate on just a couple of them. The most obvious lesson is to note how the disciples came to notice him in the breaking of the bread, as is explicated for us in verse 35. Second, notice the first thing that Jesus does with his disciples on His appearance to them is have the Mass. What?, you may say! Look at the text! First Jesus explains the Scriptures to them, just as we do at mass in the Liturgy of the Word. Then He goes on to the Liturgy of the Eucharist by making Himself present to them in the "Breaking of the Bread" Yes, there can be no doubt about it. The real presence of our Lord in the Eucharist is one of the most clearest doctrines in all of Scripture. Only those who have closed their eyes to the beauty and wonder of Catholic teaching can overlook this plain teaching. Let us all pray that Almighty God will bless us all with a deeper and clearer understanding of this our greatest treasure, THE HOLY EUCHARIST, Amen\👏👏
@LarrySanger 4 ай бұрын
Go write in your own blog. Are you really so desperately uncertain of the strength of your own views that you can’t respond to the things I actually said? You must simply lecture on, without any relevance to anything I said? You aren’t aware of how weak this makes your point of view look, if you can’t respond substantively?
@bibleman8010 4 ай бұрын
@@LarrySanger guess you didnt read my response i did respond to what you said to bad your head is stuck up you rear😘😘
@bibleman8010 4 ай бұрын
- St. Peter in his letters said: The blood of Jesus was shed for us before the creation of the world, but was only revealed to us when Jesus was crucified on the cross, died and rose again. 1 Peter 1:18-22🤦♀🤦♀ 18 Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things as gold or silver, from your vain conversation of the tradition of your fathers: 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb unspotted and undefiled, 20 Foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but manifested in the last times for you, 21 Who through him are faithful in God, who raised him up from the dead, and hath given him glory, that your faith and hope might be in God.22 Purifying your souls in the obedience of charity, with a brotherly love, from a sincere heart love one another earnestly: - St. John also says this in Revelation 13:7-10 that the death of Christ was purposed right from the beginning. (Revelation 13:7-10) 7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them. And power was given him over every tribe, and people, and tongue, and nation. 8 And all that dwell upon the earth adored him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb, which was slain from the beginning of the world. 9 If any man have an ear, let him hear. 10 He that shall lead into captivity, shall go into captivity: he that shall kill by the sword, must be killed by the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. - In the book of John, Jesus tells and instructs to the people (Jews) about The Eucharist. (John 6:43, 51-55, 66-68) “‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’ So 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 you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.’ . . . After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him. Jesus said to the twelve, ‘Do you also wish to go away?’ Simon Peter answered him, ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life’” - And John sees another vision in Revelation 5:6, a slain lamb in heaven, (Revelation 5:6) And I saw: and behold in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the ancients, a Lamb standing as it were slain, having seven horns and seven eyes: which are the seven Spirits of God, sent forth into all the earth.
@bibleman8010 4 ай бұрын
1 Corinthians 11 :20-34 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. 😉😉 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come. The Sacrifice of God is past, present and future! It is eternal because it is outside of space and time. The sacrifice by Christ dying and suffering was done in space and time 2000 years ago, when Christ (God) chose to became man (incarnate), this is when He went inside space and time. The holy sacrifice of the Mass is a "sacrifice" being presented to us again on a daily basis, and this sacrifice is outside space and time in a mystical and spiritual way because God is not limited in space and time, EVERYTHING TO HIM is an eternal event, and this is the only sacrifice pleasing to God The Father. Why do you think St. Paul was instructing the Corinthians about The Eucharist if it is not an eternal sacrifice or just a mere "symbol". (1 Corinthians 11:27), Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. - And this was after Christ's Ascension.
@LarrySanger 4 ай бұрын
Still waiting for a response to my video. Your comments have nothing to do with what I said. Further non-responsive comments will be deleted.
@bibleman8010 4 ай бұрын
Vs 54, "Whoever eats My flesh, and drinks My blood, has eternal life; and I will raise him up on the last day." Did He say to eat the symbol of His flesh? Vs 55, Jesus said, "For My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed." Vs 56, Jesus said, "He that eats My flesh and drinks My blood dwells in Me, and I in him." Did He say, 'He that eats a symbol of My flesh...'. How can a mere symbol fulfill this promise? Does only a symbol of Christ dwell in us? I thought GOD Himself dwelt within us, 1John 4:12-13. Vs 59, This verse shows that Jesus taught this discourse to all the people. Vs 60,They doubt a third time when many disciples said, "This is a hard saying, who can hear it"? The Jews were instilled by many Old Testament verses, admonishing them not to consume blood. See Deut 12:23, Lev 17:11and 14. They must have thought this was something akin to cannibalism. Is this what you think too? At any point did Jesus back down? Explain to me, if this chapter is symbolic, why did He not explain the symbolism to them? Vs 61, Jesus did not back down, for He said, "Does this offend you?" He knew their thoughts and He certainly knew the Old Testament verses about the consumption of blood. In the next verse, He separated spiritual things from earthly things. 🤦♀🤦♀Vs 63*, Jesus said, "It is the spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing. The words I speak to you, they are spirit, and they are life." Did He say He was speaking figuratively or in parables? This is the second verse detractors use to try to "prove" that Jesus spoke figuratively for the whole chapter. Did Jesus say "My" flesh? No, He said "the" flesh. What Jesus had said was, that we cannot accept this mystery if we accept it in too human a way, by having an earthly view of things. Those who can only think of cannibalism, are they not having an earthly view? See John 3:6, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Verse 63 means that we should not have a carnal human understanding of His words, but a spiritual understanding. In John, chapter 6, Jesus had not only called the 12 Apostles, there was also much larger group of other disciples. Things seemed to be going pretty well. That is until Jesus said “For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood,dwelleth in me, and I in him.” This was too much for many of his disciples and “From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.” Jesus turns to the 12 and asks, “Will ye also go away? Simon Peter gives the same answer that I find myself saying to those who tell me I should leave the Catholic Church for this reason or that one, “Lord, to whom shall we go?” No matter what a certain priest does, no matter what scandals hit the church, despite whatever corruption or abuse of power might exist, and despite whatever mistakes the Church has made throughout history, “to whom shall we go?” for here is the body and blood of Christ given for a sinner as miserable as I. Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus says, this IS my body and blood. Jesus does not say, this is a symbol of my body and blood. Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19-20 - the Greek phrase is "Toutoestin to soma mou." This phraseology means "this is actually" or "this is really" my body and blood.
@LarrySanger 4 ай бұрын
I still don’t believe you actually watched or understood the video. You have not actually responded to anything I said. Where did I assert that the meaning of the Eucharist is symbolic? You seem to want me to go back and construct an argument that it is. That was not what I was doing. I was not saying what the Eucharist is: I was saying what it is *not.* It is not divine cannibalism, that’s for sure. He said it is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing. This is not a cryptic, throwaway remark; it is the main clarificatory point he is making about the meaning of his body and blood as food. And that is a constraint on any theory of the Eucharist. You may go ahead and believe in the “real presence” (if you are surprised that I say this, then clearly you did not watch the video): but in explaining what this means, you are *not* free to assert that it is acceptable (much less required or salvific) to drink fleshly human blood. Nor are you free to deny that it is the Spirit that gives life or that the flesh actually profits anything. For your Lord and Master says so! Be very careful not to fall into the very error that the “Jews“ (Pharisees and Sadducees) fell into with regard to this saying of his!
@bibleman8010 4 ай бұрын
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 you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood,dwelleth in me, and I in him.” This was too much for many of his disciples and “From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.” Jesus turns to the 12 and asks, “Will ye also go away? Vs 61, Jesus did not back down, for He said, "Does this offend you?" it offends protestants. They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. There is no other passage in the New testament other than John 6: 35-56 where Jesus emphasizes his teaching repeatedly. In the Gospel of John, four times our Lord says that he is the bread and five times He says that its his flesh we have to eat. He instituted this sacrament by giving his flesh to eat in the upper room in Jerusalem on the eve of the Passover (Matthew 26:26-28) We understand that Eucharistic sacrament he instituted was again celebrated at Emmaus after his resurrection (Luke 24: 30-31).🤔🤔
@LarrySanger 4 ай бұрын
I see no evidence here that you actually watched the video. So now, try actually watching the video, and seeing what sense your comments make. Since I don’t believe you will take the time to do so, I will not take the time to reply to you and your comments.
@sheagaier7582 4 ай бұрын
Wow! I can’t believe it’s been a year since I posted my original comment. The mini gravel walks version is from the playing of Francie dearg o’beirne. I learned this tune during glencolumbkille fiddle week from Martin mcginley
@MichaelTowns 4 ай бұрын
Great video. Thank you. I find your recent spiritual journey fascinating.
@LarrySanger 4 ай бұрын
Thanks, Michael!
@TimChambersUSA 4 ай бұрын
Larry, God loves you and so do I. I won't take offense, but I shall say that I am greatly disappointed that you call out Orthodox, [Roman] Catholics and Lutherans [Missouri Synod?]. Did you have no conversations with Anglicans? I'm right here, Friend! We Anglicans believe in the Real Presence. This video should go viral, IMHO! In response to your comment that the loaves & fishes miracle echoes back to God sending manna to the Hebrews during the exodus, it occurs to me for the first time that while the Hebrews demanded meat (manna should have been enough), God didn't materialize meat. He sent quail. Natural quail. I think it's profound that Jesus materialized both bread (echoing manna) and meat (fish). I will never eat fish the same way again!
@LarrySanger 4 ай бұрын
Thanks, friend! I honestly hadn’t tried to think of every denomination. And Anglicans are so diverse in their doctrine anyway, right? But it’s funny that you want to join my targets!
@lajphd 4 ай бұрын
Glad to see you making content like this!
@ThankYouJesusTheChrist 4 ай бұрын
On my watchlist, thank you Larry. Please keep this up - videos from you about the Bible and theology are exactly what we needed.
@LarrySanger 4 ай бұрын
Thanks!
@Gilbert.Suhendra 5 ай бұрын
Stay Strong Larry Sanger, Your saying are True of All wikipedia are Clear Bias and not accurate from what they do are Propaganda, not an educate
@Gilbert.Suhendra 5 ай бұрын
God Bless, You
@SuperMemoVideo 7 ай бұрын
the most important thing is to keep the kid interested! :) ... here it seems there is a lot of enthusiasm on both sides! :)
@thomassirianni2883 10 ай бұрын
Not bad Larry!
@LarrySanger 4 ай бұрын
Thanks, Thomas!
@LarrySanger 10 ай бұрын
See kzfaq.info/get/bejne/qspplc9mzdy-ooE.htmlsi=VaPIoMofikswc9Ig
@LarrySanger 11 ай бұрын
Yes, a bit frenetic and sloppy that way! 😂
@codylangoehr4609 5 ай бұрын
can you please give ucn aka fnaf 7 and fnaf 6 back their wikipedia page forever and ever
@LarrySanger 3 ай бұрын
@@codylangoehr4609 I have zero authority over such things anymore.
@codylangoehr4609 3 ай бұрын
@@LarrySanger oh i calmly didn't know
@bajolalupa4323 11 ай бұрын
Its like that scene on titanic
@TheSocialJusticeGeneral 11 ай бұрын
Sounds good, keep it up!! You play any mandolin?
@LarrySanger 11 ай бұрын
Nope, only picked up a friend’s once or twice.
@Sara-hy1ru Жыл бұрын
❤
@ashyybo Жыл бұрын
i love this !
@LarrySanger Жыл бұрын
Now 17, this kid developed this website: encyclosearch.org.
@Clayton-ys3qb Жыл бұрын
The inflection, he knows what he's reading for sure. Is he tacking on to his G.P.A. for college nowadays?
@LarrySanger Жыл бұрын
He's homeschooled. He's 17 now. In the last couple years he has developed this: encyclosearch.org/
@Clayton-ys3qb Жыл бұрын
@@LarrySanger Ahhh, fresh air! When I started hearing things about Wikipedia, I did some random searches and Lincoln was my first. Misquoting Lincoln, amongst their own opinions they'd attributed to him, is as bad as it gets. The more Sangers, the better. So vital. Congrats, great job.
@simon.5 Жыл бұрын
Thank you for your thoughts on this; I very much agree with your observations although being seven years late. Surely in others, but most unfortunately within myself. Solzhenitsyn made very similar points in his 1978 Harvard commencement speech "A World Split Apart". It seems to me things in our western societies have gotten even worse since on a moral dimension. Personally, I think that a lot of our moral values worth preserving (and obtained over thousands of years) are encoded within Christian tradition, music and writing. In the last couple hundred centuries, however, central Christian claims about history and the nature of the universe have been rendered obsolete (or at least highly unlikely) by the scientific method and enlightenment ideas. This became more and more apparent to the average person as mass-education and information spreading evolved. The failure of the church and other Christian institutions to clearly separate the ideas of "how to act" from the ideas of "how things are" and correcting itself regarding the latter, led many down the path of ridiculing all of Christianity instead of preserving and learning from the valuable parts. I ask myself why we should expect an educated person to accept Christian morals and ideals when he or she (quite rightfully so in my opinion) reject the idea of a historical resurrected Jesus being the son of god?
@LarrySanger Жыл бұрын
I have changed my mind about God since writing this and making this video. While I still think it is possible to defend a Natural Law morality, I now think the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is remarkable. The whole case for Christian doctrine is far stronger than I understood until I finally read the Bible carefully all the way through, for good understanding, and getting my questions answered (not to say I *believed* the answers I got; I just finally got introduced to many points of doctrine that I was simply ignorant about). I won't make the case here. I just had to say that.
@dharpbend2801 Жыл бұрын
Thanks Larry...I happened to play with Cilla a couple evenings ago...I like both of them
@kickin_ass Жыл бұрын
megamind /j
@spamgarbage6999 Жыл бұрын
I just went down a rabbit hole of reading about kitty o’neil thanks for posting this! I wonder what the sand jig looked like.
@huntersaville2936 Жыл бұрын
Hell yeah brother
@yvesmarthe8211 Жыл бұрын
So beautiful!
@LarrySanger Жыл бұрын
Thank you!
@yvesmarthe8211 Жыл бұрын
Hello, Mr. Sanger! Please make more videos for kids. I love Samger Academy!
@LarrySanger Жыл бұрын
Wish I had the time. Glad you like them. Some day I hope I’ll get back into that.
@davidnaylor83 Жыл бұрын
Wow! My four year old has also started reading Harry Potter (in Swedish) so I had to check for others doing the same thing. This kid reads even more fluently. Amazing!
@2ingrams Жыл бұрын
Wikipedia is considered unreliable sources yet they are all over KZfaq videos claiming to be fighting disinformation yet everything they claim is always biased and defends the left. Heres a sample of what they do kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oc-Cmq2Kst2aiXU.html
@sheagaier7582 Жыл бұрын
ooooh mccahill's hornpipe is good! i play mccahills reel all the time!
@sheagaier7582 Жыл бұрын
great sets! I actually can play the entire red crow album on my fiddle! 😁
@LarrySanger Жыл бұрын
Well done!
@sheagaier7582 Жыл бұрын
@@LarrySanger thanks! I actually got to play on stage with altan a few weeks ago! 😍
@oliverspin8963 Жыл бұрын
Pleasant, transportive. Thank you Larry.
@sheagaier7582 Жыл бұрын
nice slip jig!
@MindbodyMedic 2 жыл бұрын
what age did you pick it up? very challenging instrument
@LarrySanger 2 жыл бұрын
26. Yes, not an easy instrument but it can be done!
@Stumpgod11 2 жыл бұрын
A true pioneer of modern society. All love Larry ✌️
@pawel1.7.22 2 жыл бұрын
Love you larry