Posted on 05/25/2016 3:57:03 AM PDT by JosephJames
I will not answer sheer insult, which tempts me to sin. And so I must now refrain from further discussion.
..LET you have...
Now you MINDREAD me?
You can't even find where YOU used the word BIOLOGICAL!
Your umbrage has been noted.
The catholic mass teaches adherents to your religion that they ingest (that's biological) the Body, Blood, soul and divinity of the Christ on the Cross. Sorry, that sounds precisely like biological reductionism, since you are teaching adherents that they eat biological items of The Christ on the Cross. But Jesus is no longer on the Cross. He finished that task and is now risen from the tomb and occupying a physical body which does not use blood to distribute the Life Of God throughout His resurrected body.
Post #547: “... because it connotes, to me, a kind of biological reductionism.” A more succinct identification of the error in the Mass could not be found! Thanks for the phrase, I’ll use it now to point to the error in the eating of Jesus and drinking His blood ‘to obtain the life of His flesh which is in His blood’. Your phrase succinctly describes the error catholiciism sustains by pointing to John six as source for the biological reductionism of Catholic Mass.
Your religion has made the same error that the seekers after signs in John 6 made, taking what Jesus was teaching on spiritual reality, except your religion has taken the biological reductionism even further into error by claiming that is what you can do to get God Life in you, reducing the exercise to biological diddling for squat. Jesus proved He was speaking of spiritual reality, that His body and blood of His Physical pre-crucifixion body were for spiritual life ... "John 6:63 the spirit it is that is giving life; the flesh doth not profit anything; the sayings that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life; Young's Literal Translation from the Greek
The catholic mass, teaching adherents that they eat the LITERAL body and blood and soul and divinity of the Christ on the Cross is the ultimate biological reductionism. Thanks for the phrase. It is most precise.
Mormons have made the same claim and we see the error this has caused in their beliefs.
However Scripture testifies it is complete and sufficient.
15and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:15-17 NASB
30Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. John 20:30-31 NASB
Mrs Don-o and FourtySeven insist to me that they eat a mystical blood, yet their catechism teaches them that it is the real event of crucifixion which their priesthood continues in the Mass. Do catholic not see how they are trying to have it both ways, a real biological death in crucifixion continued in order to feed mystical blood to them as a real body, blood, soul, and divinity is served to them in a wafer? Is it THAT hard to comprehend that Jesus spoke of the spiritual feast, possible for you and me because He sacrificed His human body and blood for our redemption? [ This biological reductionism has made for catholics a blasphemy even the seekers after signs who walked away in John 6 would not condone. I believe with all my heart that Jesus offered His real body and blood on the cross for my redemption. I have His LIFE in me by GOD's Promise, not a happy meal. I continue to proclaim His Grace in Christ for us every time I break the bread and sip the cup of wine in Remembrance of what He has done. He finished it; I cannot add anything to what He as God only could accomplish on my behalf. No org can parse such Glory as He alone is worthy. No org can command Him to obey their rite and ritual continuation of what He has finished. I eat the bread and sip the wine to spiritually connect to the proclaiming of this Glorious Eternal Truth of Him as Savior and Lord.
bump
Lest we forget, the religion of catholiciism has been at this look-alike fabrication process for two thousand years. Jesus condemned it in His Revelation to John, yet the additions have continued even unto this day! And now we read that catholics believe a duplicitous God is at the heart of their rituals, a God knows the end from the beginning who proclaims it a law violation to eat the blood and eat the flesh of a human being but condones this violation to establish a New Covenant! I was floored by the open assertion tossed at me! But it explains a lot about the ‘other religion’, Catholicism. The god of that religion is duplicitous ... biological reductionism indeed! Jesus taught the spiritual; Catholicism reduces it to god contradicting himself, and they see nothing in error with that? Astonishing!
Metmom: No it doesn't. The church has the Holy spirit to guide us into all truth. Without the enlightening of the Holy Spirit in a person's life, any Scripture is meaningless to them. And Scripture really isn't all that difficult to read. it says what it says. The only reason *interpretation* needs to come in is to make it say something that it doesn't plainly say. Then it needs to be *interpreted* to get the *correct* meaning. Beware of *interpretation, especially if it's convoluted and does NOT fit with the rest of the revealed body of Scripture.
=========
Interpretation is the great gift by which the Gospel is spread and the Word of God preached expositionally to every people, based on an honest form of exegesis (which the Roman model is not). Even in the languages of the original manuscripts, the method of translation and interpretation was used by Levi, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul explicitly:
hermeneia, noun, Strong's G2058, see 1 Cor. 12:10, 14:26
hermeneuo, verb, Strong's G2059, see Jn. 1:38,1:42; Jn. 9:7; Heb. 7:2
methermeneuo, verb, Mt. 1:23; Mk. 5:41,15:22,15:34; Jn. 1:41; Acts 4:36, 13:8
Let me propose that we do not diminish the importance of interpretation, which is necessary to the communication of Bible truths in human language, even as The God communicated with the first Adam. To express the need of once more setting forth the principles of hemeneutics, the science of interpretation, evangelical scholars summed them up in the following statement proceeding from the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy:
"Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics" (1982)
This document affirms that Truth is what corresponds to Reality.
It is the failure of the post-Apostolic "church," infested by Platonism and its perversion of pure Scripture by misinterpreting it, that the Romanists have come up with all kinds of inconsistencies, including the unexplainable phenomenon of claiming the elements bespeaking Christ's passion have somehow been converted into another kind of material in another dimension that does not match with any rational Biblical concept.
Here are some basic interpretive principles in which the Romanistas get tangled up by ignoring or rejecting them:
=========
WE AFFIRM the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text.
WE DENY the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning which the literal sense does not support.
=======
WE AFFIRM that any preunderstandings which the interpreter brings to Scripture should be in harmony with scriptural teaching and subject to correction by it.
WE DENY that Scripture should be required to fit alien preunderstandings, inconsistent with itself, such as naturalism, evolutionism, scientism, secular humanism, and relativism.
========
WE AFFIRM that a person is not dependent for understanding of Scripture on the expertise of biblical scholars.* WE DENY that a person should ignore the fruits of the technical study of Scripture by biblical scholars.
========
WE AFFIRM that the only type of preaching which sufficiently conveys the divine revelation and its proper application to life is that which faithfully expounds the text of Scripture as the Word of God.
WE DENY that the preacher has any message from God** apart from the text of Scripture.
========
* = including the "patristics"
** = typified by the "Magisterium" of the Roman organization
(The full text with commentary may be read at the above link. It is well worthy of reading closely to prepare answers addressing the errors of misled catholicity.)
********
You definitely need to go beyond what it says in Munificentissimus Deus, as the evidence simply does not exist where and when it surely should (earliest centuries), and the explanation for its latter progressive adoption is that it was a fable that became held as a fact. Which the linked post goes into.
Including this from Ratzinger,
Before Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven was defined, all theological faculties in the world were consulted for their opinion. Our teachers' answer was emphatically negative... Altaner, the patrologist from Wurzburg¦had proven in a scientifically persuasive manner that the doctrine of Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven was unknown before the 5C; this doctrine, therefore, he argued, could not belong to the "apostolic tradition. And this was his conclusion, which my teachers at Munich shared. - J. Ratzinger, Milestones (Ignatius, n.d.), 58-59.
Ratzinger must thus resort to arguing that the Lord brought to Rome's memory what history "forgot," which is quite inventive.
In reality, assurance that the Assumption is real rests upon the premise of Rome professed veracity, which rests upon herself.
methermeneuo, Strong's G3177
“The concept I am explaining here is beautifully (if not also primitively) described by St. Augustine in his 27th Tractate on the 6th Chapter of John.
Here: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1701027.htm";
I went there and didn’t make it past the third line and found error IAW God’s Word.
“for it is concerning the body of the Lord which He said that He gave to be eaten for eternal life.”
Actually you can’t find one Scripture that says that it is to be eaten for eternal life. It is to be eaten in remembrance of the “Act that granted us Eternal Life”
1 Corinthians 11:24-26 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me.
25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.
26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come.
For when you do this you proclaim the Lord’s death which means you proclaim the New Covenant/Will/Testament. Death must take place for it to become effective not the eating of something.
Hebrews 9:16-18 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
16 For where there is a testament, the death of the testator must of necessity come in.
17 For a testament is of force, after men are dead: otherwise it is as yet of no strength, whilst the testator liveth.
18 Whereupon neither was the first indeed dedicated without blood.
Lesson learned,
We don’t eat and drink communion for eternal life, but instead Christ gave his body and blood for eternal life and we eat and drink communion to remember and proclaim His death/sacrifice and the salvation that came from that Act on the Cross.
That's right up there with the tooth fairy...Neither God nor Jesus ever spoke of mystical flesh or blood so it doesn't originate from scripture...
Yes, the material is laced with dogmatic error. But the devout in that religion are not able to see it. Strong delusion anyone? That particular poster also affirmed that in their religion, God violates (in the Upper Room Passover meal) and causes the disciples to violate the God-given laws against eating human flesh and drink the blood of the creature. The explanation given was rank, also, as if God is double minded. In catholiciism, God With us violates His own laws to establish a new covenant! I was ... astonished.
You keep insisting that God violates His own Law, that the Eucharist stands against the Mosaic Law, despite repeated arguments and explanations to the contrary. You’re certainly free to disregard such arguments, but you carry on as if the Church has never provided an answer to the (incorrect) charge of cannibalism.
This is great dilemma when all one has is Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide; for numerous paths now exist in the interpretation of Scripture and how doctrine is applied. Is Baptism only for those of the age of reason, or can it be applied to infants as well? Is contraception a moral evil, or not? To what degree is all Scripture interpreted literally? Amillenial, premillenial, or postmillenial?
And on and on. We would all be akin to the Ethiopian eunuch; do we know what it is that we are reading? How can we, if there is no one to instruct us in proper exegesis? Indeed, only by the most extraordinary grace of God would one pick up a Bible - while invincibly ignorant of Christ and His Church - and understand it perfectly; yet in the annals of history, how often has this happened? After all, the Bible as we know it in its current form is a fruit of the Catholic Church:
“But should you meet with a person not yet believing the Gospel, how would you reply to him where he to say, I do not believe? For my part, I should not believe the Gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.” - Augustine, “Against the Epistle of Manichaeus Called Fundamental, Chapter 5”
Is it not prudent to seek truthful instruction? Even in the days of Christ’s public ministry, the multitudes who sought Him out professed that He was John the Baptist, or Elijah, or one of the prophets; such people were witnesses of His words and His miracles, and yet got it wrong! Separated from those events by nearly two millennia, what hope have we to fruitfully learn of our Lord and who He is without disciplined teaching?
Fortunately, despite their frailty and weaknesses, the Apostles were there to bear witness and to profess (”You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God.”). How fortuitous are we to have access to their writings, and that of their successors.
The historicity of Catholic teaching to the earliest days of the Church is undeniable, in their ‘plain sense’, to use a familiar term.
“’The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the Blood of Christ? ‘ (1 Cor. 10:16). Very persuasively spoke he, and with awe. For what he says is this: ‘This which is in the cup is that which flowed from His side, and of that do we partake.’ But he called it a cup of blessing, because holding it in our hands, we so exalt Him in our hymn, wondering, astonished at His unspeakable gift, blessing Him, among other things, for the pouring it out, but also for the imparting thereof to us all. ‘Wherefore if you desire blood,’ says He, ‘redden not the altar of idols with the slaughter of brute beasts, but My altar with My blood.’ Tell me, what can be more tremendous than this? What more tenderly kind?” - John Chrysostom, “Homilies on 1st Corinthians, 24:1”
“’My Flesh is meat indeed, and My Blood is drink’ (Jn. 6:56). You hear Him speak of His Flesh and of His Blood, you perceive the sacred pledges (conveying to us the merits and power) of the Lord’s death, and you dishonor His Godhead? Hear His own words: ‘A spirit has not flesh and bones’ (Lk. 24:39). Now we, as often as we receive the Sacramental Elements, which by the mysterious efficacy of holy prayer are transformed into the Flesh and the Blood, ‘do show the Lord’s Death’ (1 Cor. 11:26).” - Ambrose, “To Gratian, on the Christian Faith, Book 4, Chapter 10”
“’He that offers the sacrifice of praise glorifies me, and in this way will I show him my salvation’ (Ps. 49:23). Before the coming of Christ, the flesh and blood of this sacrifice were foreshadowed in the animals slain; in the passion of Christ the types were fulfilled by the true sacrifice; after the ascension of Christ, this sacrifice is commemorated in the sacrament.” - Augustine, “Reply to Faustus the Manichean, 21:20”
“Now, the blood of the Lord is twofold: one is corporeal, redeeming us from corruption; the other is spiritual, and it is with that we are anointed. To drink the blood of Jesus is to participate in His incorruption. Yet, the Spirit is the strength of the Word in the same way that the blood is of the body. Similarly, wine is mixed with water and the Spirit is joined to man; the first, the mixture, provides feasting that faith may be increased; the other, the Spirit, leads us on to incorruption. The union of both, that is, of the potion and the Word, is called the Eucharist, a gift worthy of praise and surprisingly fair; those who partake of it are sanctified in body and soul, for it is the will of the Father that man, a composite made by God, be united to the Spirit and to the Word mystically.” - Clement of Alexandria, “Christ the Educator, Book 2, Chapter 2”
“Even of itself the teaching of the blessed Paul (1 Cor. 11:23) is sufficient to give you a full assurance concerning those Divine Mysteries, of which having been deemed worthy, you are become of the same body and blood with Christ. For you have just heard him say distinctly, That Our Lord Jesus Christ in the night in which He was betrayed, took bread, and He had given thanks He broke it, and gave to His disciples, saying, ‘Take, eat, this is My Body’; and having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, ‘Take, drink, this is My Blood’ (Mt 26:26ff). Since then He Himself declared and said of the Bread, This is My Body, who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He Himself affirmed and said, This is My Blood, who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His Blood?” - Cyril of Jerusalem, “Catecheses, 22:1”
“He once in Cana of Galilee, turned the water into wine, akin to blood, and is it incredible that He should have turned wine into blood? When called to a bodily marriage, He miraculously wrought that wonderful work; and on the children of the bridechamber, shall He no much rather be acknowledge to have bestowed the fruition of His Body and Blood?” - Cyril of Jerusalem, “Catecheses, 22:2”
“The body which is born of the holy Virgin is in truth body united with divinity, not that the body which was received up into the heavens descends, but that bread itself and the wine are changed into God’s body and blood. But if you enquire as to how this happens, it is enough for you to learn that it was through the Holy Spirit, just as the Lord took on Himself flesh that subsisted in Him and was born of the holy Mother of God through the Spirit. And we know nothing further save that the Word of God is true and enrgises and is omnipotent, but the manner of this cannot be searched out. But one can put it well thus, that just as in nature the bread by the eating and the wine and the water by the drinking are changed into the body and blood of the eater and drinker, and do not become a different body from the former one, so the bread of the table and the wine and water are supernaturally changed by the invocation and presence of the Holy Spirit into the body and blood of Christ, and are not two but one and the same...
The bread and the wine are not merely figures of the body and blood of Christ (heaven forbid!) but the deified body of the Lord itself: for the Lord has said, ‘This is My boy’, not, this is a figure of My Body; and ‘My blood’, not, a figure of My blood (Mt. 26:26, 28)...
But if some persons called the bread and the wine antetypes of the body and blood of the Lord, as did the divinely inspired Basil, they said so not after the consecration but before the consecration, so calling the offering itself...
Further antetypes of future things are spoken of, not as though they were not in reality Christ’s body and blood, but that now through them we partake of Christ’s divinity, while then we shall partake mentally through the vision alone.” - John of Damascus, “Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book 4, Chapter 13.”
“How was Christ carried in His Own Hands? Because when He commended His Own Body and Blood, He took into His Hands that which the faithful know; and in a manner carried Himself, when He said, ‘This is my Body.’” - Augustine, “Expositions on the Psalms, No. 33:1:10”
What a tremendous grace and blessing that Christ established with His Church, with His Sacraments! As heresies, error, wickedness, and the minions of Satan seek to strike at His Bride (as they have throughout the ages), I will never forget Christ’s guarantee that the gates of Hell will not prevail; thus, I will strive forward toward greater faith, hope, and charity with my head held high, trusting in Him.
*That* is the Catholic Church, and within the Church I am freer to follow, serve, and praise God in capacities I would have never dreamed of growing up in the Baptist/Reformed tradition.
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit!
Now; let's get Mary to help us!!
"The Most Holy Virgin in these last times in which we live has given a new efficacy to the recitation of the Rosary to such an extent that there is no problem,
no matter how difficult it is, wheter temporal or above all spiritual, in the personal life of each one of us, of our families...that cannot be solved by the Rosary.
There is no problem, I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we cannot resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary."
Sister Lucia dos Santos
(Given to St. Dominic and Blessed Alan de la Roche)
| 1 | Whoever shall faithfully serve me by the recitation of the Rosary, shall receive powerful graces. |
| 2. | I promise my special protection and the greatest graces to all those who shall recite the Rosary. |
| 3. | The Rosary shall be a powerful armor against hell, it will destroy vice, decrease sin, and defeat heresies |
| 4. | It will cause virtue and good works to flourish; it will obtain for souls the abundant mercy of God; it will withdraw the hearts of people from the love of the world and its vanities, and will lift them to the desire of eternal things. Oh, that souls would sanctify themselves by this means. |
| 5. | The soul which recommends itself to me by the recitation of the Rosary, shall not perish. |
| 6. | Whoever shall recite the Rosary devoutly, applying Himself to the consideration of its Sacred Mysteries shall never be conquered by misfortune. God will not chastise Him in His justice, he shall not perish by an unprovided death; if he be just, he shall remain in the grace of God, and become worthy of eternal life. |
| 7. | Whoever shall have a true devotion for the Rosary shall not die without the Sacraments of the Church. |
| 8. | Those who are faithful to recite the Rosary shall have during their life and at their death the light of God and the plentitude of His graces; at the moment of death they shall participate in the merits of the Saints in Paradise. |
| 9. | I shall deliver from purgatory those who have been devoted to the Rosary. |
| 10. | The faithful children of the Rosary shall merit a high degree of glory in Heaven. |
| 11. | You shall obtain all you ask of me by the recitation of the Rosary. |
| 12. | All those who propagate the Holy Rosary shall be aided by me in their necessities. |
| 13. | I have obtained from my Divine Son that all the advocates of the Rosary shall have for intercessors the entire celestial court during their life and at the hour of death |
| 14. | All who recite the Rosary are my children, and brothers and sisters of my only Son, Jesus Christ. |
| 15. | Devotion of my Rosary is a great sign of predestination. |
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.