Behold, The Lamb of God

Behold, the Lamb of God

By Richard P. Joseph

It appears that there is an ongoing controversy concerning what many call “Holy Communion”.  I believe it is one of the most misunderstood doctrines in christendom.   The Catholic doctrine on this is called transubstantiation.  This is the belief that the host and the wine, once blessed by the priest, becomes the actual body and blood of Christ.  Protestants do not accept that doctrine but I do not believe they have come up with an acceptable alternative that I can embrace.   I have been trying to come up with a way to articulate my belief on this subject but, as usual, it requires patience until the Holy Spirit himself enlightens you on any given subject.  I will share with you where I am at this point in my journey and trust that God will not lead us astray.  

Many followers of Jesus did go astray over this very subject.  In John chapter six Jesus was explaining to the crowd that he was the true manna but they could not grasp it.  They were so focused on the flesh that they became blinded to the spiritual realm.  Finally Jesus said;

53 ... “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.54 Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For My flesh is food indeed,[a] and My blood is drink indeed.

Many took Jesus as some sort of cannibal and turned away that very hour.  So, what did Jesus really mean when he said to eat his flesh and drink his blood?  I can assure you one thing for certain and that is that he did not mean that the bread and wine were going to magically turn into his body and blood.  In fact this is just another “task” that Catholics use in order to feel like they are doing God’s will.  They perform many tasks as if they have a checklist to accomplish to appease God.  Many perform these menial tasks but never experience a conversion or any real life changes.  This is a sure sign that God is not in it.  When God is in it, lives change and one becomes a new creation.  The law cannot change a man but the spirit can.  

As I explained in an earlier article (End of the Law), Jesus became the fulfilment of the law.  This means that he also fulfilled the miracle of the manna.  In John chapter six the crowd followed Jesus to the other side of the lake.  Jesus began at that point to explain his sayings about him being the true manna. He attempted to convince them that the true meaning had spiritual implications, not physical.  

26 Jesus answered them and said, “Most assuredly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. 27 Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him.”

Jesus wanted them to be filled with the spirit of God, not with wheat.  At first they wanted this new breed but right away began asking for a sign but Jesus knew that many were not really seeking God but just trying to solve their physical ailments.  Then Jesus began dropping bombshells to clear out the unbelievers.  

49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.”

Then he insults them again:

53 Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.

After many in the crowd left he had to explain it to his disciples who were also confused.  

63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.

He assures them that his words were spiritual not physical.  He is not talking about turning bread into flesh.  He is talking about him becoming the true spiritual passover meal.  

John the baptist clearly identified Jesus as the new passover offering that God would offer.

29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

David B. Curtis of the Berean Bible Church in Virginia (Lesson 653) gave a powerful lesson on the seven feasts of the Lord.  In that lesson he showed that Jesus never did eat that last passover meal; what he really ate was the preparation meal the night before the passover.  Since it was this passover that Jesus would become the fulfilment of the passover lamb, he could not be there to eat it because he "was" it.  This puts the whole flesh eating controversy to rest.  A passover lamb was meant to be eaten.  So, as the Jewish world ate a physical lamb during the passover, the true believers ate the spiritual body and drank the spiritual blood of Christ.    

The point that Jesus was attempting to convey is that he was about to become the fulfillment of the Passover celebration.  He will lead his people out of slavery to sin and the law.  Instead of eating a lamb, believers now eat Jesus spiritually.  He is our Passover lamb.  Whenever we break bread with other believers we are to celebrate the true Passover meaning and glorify God above in Jesus Christ.  Simply eating the bread as if it is some sort of commandment is not sufficient or biblical.  

Scoffers Dilemma

Scoffers Dilemma

By Richard P. Joseph

According to the common futurist doctrine that nearly all preachers adhere to, the return of Christ is still in the future; but that’s as far as they know.  Of course the scammers keep predicting that it is right around the corner and all you need to do is buy their CDs and books and you will be able to know for sure.  But in reality it could still be 10,000 years away which leads me to one basic question;  When should the unbelievers start scoffing?  As you all know, Peter predicted that there would be scoffers in the last days.

 2 Peter 3:3-4 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming?

If the scoffers are to come just before the parousia then all we need to do is wait for them to scoff.  Right?  It’s been 2,000 years already, don’t you think that is long enough for people to start scoffing?  I do.  I mean, how much time do you give someone who says that they will return within one generation?  If Jesus did not give us time markers then that would mean he was probably a scam artist and didn’t really have a legitimate plan.  He would be in the same boat as the evolutionists are who use millions of years to sway the uneducated into believing that they are legitimate even though you can’t see it.  But the fact remains that Jesus did give us a timetable to work with and that was clearly within the generation of the Apostles and no later.  That is why Paul was already getting scoffed at in his lifetime.  Paul finally warned them by quoting Habakkuk 1:5

‘BEHOLD, YOU SCOFFERS, AND MARVEL, AND PERISH;

        FOR I AM ACCOMPLISHING A WORK IN YOUR DAYS,

        A WORK WHICH YOU WILL NEVER BELIEVE, THOUGH SOMEONE SHOULD DESCRIBE IT TO YOU.’”

Habakkuk warned his people in his day about the impending destruction coming upon them by the Babylonians.  Paul used the same verse to warn Israel about the impending doom that they would suffer by the Romans.  

Peter clearly identified that he was certainly living in the last days of “the present age” and knew the “age to come” was at the very door.  

1 Peter 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers.

So, we are now in a dilemma.  If Peter said the end of all things was at hand, then why are we waiting for the end now?  Who is right, Peter or the preacher?  In fact all preachers since I was young have been preaching that the end was near.  Somebody has to be wrong and I don’t think it was Peter.  In fact I think that if anyone scoffs today they actually have a legitimate gripe.  However, if Jesus did return in the first century as history confirms then the true scoffers were those that harassed the apostles in the first century.  They were all left to pay the horrible price when Jerusalem was besieged and leveled to the ground.  Once you familiarize yourself with the writings of Josephus and other first century historians, the second coming of Christ will finally make sense.   You would finally conclude that Jesus Christ is who he said he was and that he made no mistakes when he predicted that some standing and listening to him would not taste death until he came in his glory.  You can see that this solves the problem of the scoffers dilemma.