"Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
Which, as with other "verify, verily" statements, is an absolute imperative, meaning that eating the flesh of the Son of Man and drinking his blood, is unequivocally required in order to obtain spiritual life.
Which means, if consistent with literalistic interpretation, that one must take part in the Lord's supper to obtain spiritual life, and those who knowingly reject the so-called Cath "Real Presence" (though apparently this originally was an Anglican term), cannot be born again. But which contradicts modern RC teaching.
In the most unequivocal language the Apostles affirmed that the bread and wine duly consecrated on the altar did in fact become the actual Substance of the Savior. Declared the Apostle Paul: "The chalice of benediction which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?" (1 Cor. 10:16)
WRONG. Only the metaphorical view is consistent with the rest of Scripture, and as examination of the next chapter will reveal, this refers to believers showing fellowship with Christ in His death through their communal sharing in that meal done in remembrance of Christ's death, not by eating His flesh. For in context the apostle teaches that this fellowship is analogous to the fellowship pagans have with their gods in their commemorative feasts, participation by believers in which the apostle is condemning:
But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils. (1 Corinthians 10:20,21)
And how would they have fellowship with devils? Not by consuming the transubstantiated flesh of devils, but by taking part in a feast done in dedication to demons. For they which eat of the sacrifices are partakers of the altar, showing union with the object of this feast and each other, but not because the food has been transubstantiated into that of the entity it is offered to.
The overall context here is the church as the body of Christ, and that what one has liberty to eat or do is restricted by how it will affect others. Thus “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God.” (1 Corinthians 10:31-32)
And which is the context in the next chapter, in which Paul reproves Corinthian church for coming together to eat the Lord's supper, as he charges them with not actually doing so because they were eating what is supposed to be a communal meal, the “feast of charity,” (Jude 1:12) independently of each other, so that “in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken,” and thus what they were doing was to “shame them that have not.” (1Co. 11:20-22)
Therefore Paul proceeds to reiterates the words of Christ at the institution of the Lord's supper, ending with “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew [kataggellō=preach/declare] the Lord's death till he come.” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26)
For while they were supposed to be showing/declaring the Lord's unselfish sacrificial death for the body by unselfishly sharing food with other members of the body of Christ, whom Christ purchased it with His own sinless shed blood, (Acts 20:28) instead they were both eating independently and selfishly. And thus were effectively treating other members as lepers, and as if the body was not a body, and as if others were not part of the body for whom Christ died. This lack of effectual recognition is what is being referred to as “not discerning the Lord's body,” that of the body in which the members are to treat each as blood-bought beloved brethren, as Christ did. Because they were presuming to show the Lord's death for the body while acting contrary to it, therefore they were eating this bread and drinking the cup of the Lord unworthily, hypocritically, and were chastised for it, some unto death. (1Co. 11:27-32)
Because this was the case and cause of condemnation — that of not recognizing the nature of the corporate body of Christ in independently selfishly eating — versus not recognizing the elements eaten as being the body of Christ — then the apostle's solution was, “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.” (1 Corinthians 11:33-34)
"And when they had ordained to them priests in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, in whom they believed." (Acts 14:22). "
More deception and disrespect of the Holy Spirit and the word of God, as ordained to them "priests" is not what the Holy Spirit said, as in fact the distinctive word for priests is never used by the Spirit for NT priests. Nor are they shown as having a uniquely sacrificial function, which imposed functional equivalence is how Cath pastors came to be distinctively titled "priests." See here to save me time explaining this, again.
Catholic Church is the church most united in Christ. The spectacle of one billion Catholics, three-fifths of all professed Christians, perfectly, indomitably united in belief, in organization, and in worship
What? Is the author on drugs? One billion Catholics perfectly, indomitably united in belief, in organization, and in worship??? The reality is that Rome counts as members in life and in death even proabortion, prosodomote promuslim, prooccupy-movement pols, as well as the multitudes which supply them.
And Caths widely disagrre with their church, and are far less unified in basic conservative values and beliefs than those who most strongly affirm the authority of Scripture as the wholly inspired and accurate word of God.
Like His glorified body in Heaven, Christ's Mystical Body on earth never was and never will be a disjoined body
But which is not what one billion Catholics belong to, while this body also includes many Prots.
Moreover, it is evident that Christ's true church is an INFALLIBLE teacher, never liable to teach false doctrine
More evidence of drugs. It is not evident, but instead, Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.
. Teaching then to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." (Matt.28:18-20). "As the Father hath sent me, I also send you." (John 20:21). Here again is a clear, unmistakable reference to the teaching mission of His Church; for here He is telling the Apostles that they had fallen heir to His own teaching mission. His Church was to be no less of a teacher than He was.
Which manner of charge is not new, but flows from the OT, and for which an ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility was never required. Instead, souls discerned both men and writings as being of God in the light of Scriptural substantiation in word and in power
Here is another evidence that Catholic Church is an INFALLIBLE teacher, never liable to teach false doctrine: "These things have I spoken to you, abiding with you. But the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you. ... when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me. And you shall give testimony, because you are with me from the beginning." (John 14:25-26; 15:26-27).
Which also is not new or novel, for an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium was never essential for God to provide or preserve Truth, but by arguing that ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility is essential, and that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that Rome is that assuredly infallible magisterium, then the RC effectively nukes the NT church (habit forming).
.
For contrary to the Roman model, the church actually began in dissent from those who sat in the seat of Moses over Israel, (Mt. 23:2) who were the historical instruments and stewards of Scripture, "because that unto them were committed the oracles of God," (Rm. 3:2) to whom pertaineth" the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rm. 9:4) of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation as they believed, (Gn. 12:2,3; 17:4,7,8; Ex. 19:5; Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Ps, 11:4,9; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33,34; Jer. 7:23)
And instead they followed an itinerant Preacher whom the magisterium rejected, and whom the Messiah reproved them Scripture as being supreme, (Mk. 7:2-16) and established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)
In contrast, Truth claims being established upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, and the allowance of dissent from those who claim (Rome) or who do sit in power, validates the Reformation in principal. And indeed, it is abundantly evidenced that the word of God/the Lord was normally written, even if sometimes first being spoken, and that as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God.
And which testifies (Lk. 24:27,44; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23, etc.) to writings of God being recognized and established as being so (essentially due to their unique and enduring heavenly qualities and attestation), and thus they materially provide for a canon of Scripture (as well as for reason, the church, etc.)