Posted on 09/13/2014 10:57:00 AM PDT by Salvation
The Truth is offensive to a lot of people. Just look at what happened to Truth itself. He offended people and they crucified Him. Truth can also be very scary to people. So they deny it, and deny it. Been going on for 2,000 years.
That's a fact. Just look at the offense Catholics take when I point out that the Catholic Church officially admits it incorporates paganism.
64But there are some of you who do not believe.” Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.
27Do not work for food that perishes but for the food that endures for eternal life,* which the Son of Man will give you. For on him the Father, God, has set his seal.”
48I am the bread of life. 49Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died;z 50this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. 51I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.”
You stated: So please answer the question. If it’s an “unbloody sacrifice” how can you literally be drinking blood?
So you doubt the word of God in the Bible?
Transubstantiation reflects Roman Catholic faith in the literalness of the words of the Bible.
Jesus (omnipotent God) said: “This is my body; this is my blood.” And again Jesus said: “I am the bread of life;” “My flesh is true food; my blood is true drink;” “He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood ...;” etc.
Roman Catholics take Jesus at His word: the bread is his body; the wine is his blood.
From the Apostles at the Last Supper until today, the bread and wine of Eucharist looks and feels and tastes like bread and wine in the eating and drinking.
Similar to all of God’s Word, faith is essential. Faith in what? In the words of Jesus even though the bread does not look, feel, taste like flesh; even though the wine does not look, feel, taste like blood.
Transubstantiation means the substance part of the bread and wine elements changes; but the accidental parts—sight, taste, smell, touch—do not. Catholics believe that since Jesus said it and He is God, he can do it. They believe! “Transubstantiation” merely labels it.
In everyday life, it is not at all uncommon to believe in things man cannot perceive by the senses: wind, electricity, love, peace, etc. All the more when Jesus says it.
The Catholic Church has been converting pagans for the last 2,000 years.
So much for the "unbloody sacrifice". Jesus said it was NOT the real, physical flesh.
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
But still Catholics insist it's the flesh. No, Catholics don't take Jesus at His word.
Not necessarily so but the final straw is that it's not in Scripture.
If it's not in Scripture, there is nothing binding on the believer to believe the nonsense that deifies Mary.
And incorporating their pagan beliefs and customs into Catholicism.
If the candles which were formerly distributed at the Saturnalia are now identified with the feast of the Purification of our Lady? What, I ask, is there so surprising if holy bishops have allowed certain customs firmly rooted among pagan peoples, and so tenaciously adhered to by them that even after their conversion to Christianity they could not be induced to surrender them, to be transferred to the worship of the true God?" (Baronius, "Annales", ad ann. 58, n. 77). (as cited in Thurston, Herbert. "Lights." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 9. Nihil Obstat.October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910.21 Dec. 2009 )
Even though God said not to.
9 When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God shall give thee, beware lest thou have a mind to imitate the abominations of those nations...12 For the Lord abhorreth all these things, and for these abominations he will destroy them at thy coming. (Deuteronomy 18:9,12, DOT)
Not to mention the complicating factor that Jesus' blood was poured out when He died, and that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
Jesus doesn't have any blood any more.
It was shed for our atonement because without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sin.
Just what are those traditions Paul was referring to that he handed down that we are to keep that were not included in Scripture?
How do you know?
How do you know they’re from the apostles, Paul in particular?
How do you know they’ve been passed down faithfully?
What is your source for verifying all of the above?
Please provide the sources for verification purposes.
And Jesus would have had to have been drinking His own blood at the last supper along with the apostles in direct disobedience of Mosaic law.
Wrong again.
God's word is truth and Jesus is truth.
John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
John 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.
Not the church. God's Word, aka Scripture, and the Living Word.
So now it behooves you to explain away the contradiction>
Is it the Spirit or eating Jesus which gives life?
I have never seen any verification from Catholics on those, have you?
Do you consider your interpretation of this verse to be a hard saying? Would your interpretation of this verse cause Jesus' disciples to abandon Him? If so, why?
Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.But still Catholics insist it's the flesh. No, Catholics don't take Jesus at His word.On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”
Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you? Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. 65 He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”
From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.
I see it more as Catholics not citing Scripture selectively, like Protestants who only select verses that support Reformation-era traditions of men.
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep [died].
Not when it allows syncretism, that they can incorporate their pagan beliefs into Catholicism.
So if Jesus and the apostles were drinking Jesus real blood they were directly disobeying the law by drinking g blood right?
“Jesus said it was NOT the real, physical flesh”.
So what is there about these very simple words that you can’t understand? The first Christians understood, and for 2,000 years Christians have been participating in the Blood and Body of the Our Lord and Savior. You need to read the instructions of Saint Paul.
Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “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?” (1 Cor. 10:16). So when we receive Communion, we actually participate in the body and blood of Christ, not just eat symbols of them. Paul also said, “Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor. 11:27, 29). “To answer for the body and blood” of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine “unworthily” be so serious? Paul’s comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ.
Of course not. Jesus was explaining that it was NOT physical flesh and blood. If it had been they would have been sinning against the law.
You’re not answering my question. Was Jesus drinking His own blood at the last supper in direct disobedience of the law?
What does Jesus say in Scripture?
Listen to the Church.
But this begs the question, How can we trust Scripture?
We can trust the Scriptures because they are given to us by the Church.
Yes, this is a circular argument... so far.
(R.C. Sproul recognized this conundrum, saying, "The Bible is a fallible collection of infallible books.")
But Sproul was wrong. We can escape the circle.
First, begin with the uncontroversial assumption that the various biblical documents are simply historical documents. They are, by far, the most well-attested documents of their time.
From these documents we see that a man, claiming to be God, lived, died, and was presumably resurrected. He also claimed to have founded a Church, "the pillar and foundation of truth," against which the gates of hell would not prevail.
An examination of history shows that the Catholic Church has been in existence for almost 2000 years, with an unbroken line of leaders and a body of non-contradictory teaching --an incomparable historic institution. These facts accord with Christ's prophecy regarding His Church, lending credence to His claim of divinity, and the claim of the Catholic Church to be the Church that He founded.
Moreover, countless public miracles are associated with this institution, in evidence of divine superintendence.
Therefore, this institution can be trusted to have written, preserved and canonized Scripture authoritatively.
And we can trust the Church to teach us authoritatively regarding Sacred Tradition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.