Posted on 05/25/2025 4:05:48 AM PDT by JosephJames
As I’ve noted before, your screen name perfectly describes Roman Catholicism. Rome has to ADSUM to scripture for its theology.
It’s rather comical how Roman Catholics fixate on this verse and ignore the larger context of the passage and its meaning. Roman Catholics are like the unbelieving Jews in this passage. They’ve missed the correct teaching and have fixated on the wrong one. All the while ignoring the accounts of the Lord’s Supper we have in scripture and the clear message of DO THIS IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME. Not do this for salvation as Rome advocates.
Your opinion and doesn’t agree with God’s Truth or what the Apostles passed down through Christ’s Catholic Church.
Paul disagrees with you and Roman Catholicism.....which means the Lord disagrees with you and Roman Catholicism.
23For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
26For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.
1 Corinthians 11:23-26 NASB
2605 kataggéllō (from 2596 /katá, "according to, down to a point," intensifying aggellō, "declare, announce") – properly, exactly, decisively announce; to herald (proclaim) a message in a definite (binding) way.
There's not one hint of doing this for salvation.
Is the Roman Catholic concept of transubstantiation found in the unanimous writings of the ECFs?
And please don't quote Catholic Answers.
I don’t think you are serious, just anti-Catholic.
Like Purgatory and the Trinity, Transubstantiation is a word that explains the words of Jesus. This is My Body and this is My Blood. You have already admitted that you do not believe. You do not accept the words of Jesus, as “you have no life in you” (John 6:53).
Transubstantiation is the Catholic doctrine that, at the consecration during Mass, the bread and wine truly become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, even though their appearances (or “accidents”) remain unchanged.
This teaching is rooted in Scripture, especially 1 Corinthians 11:23-29, where St. Paul recounts Jesus saying, “This is my body... This cup is the new covenant in my blood.” The Church understands these words literally, meaning the substance of bread and wine is transformed into Christ’s glorified, resurrected Body and Blood (1 Cor 15:42-44; John 20:27).
The Council of Trent clarified this mystery, affirming that the change is real though not visible (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1376-1377). Thus, the Eucharist is not symbolic but the true presence of Christ.
I do not believe Rome's understanding of the passages in question.
You and all Roman Catholics have to adjust your exegesis mid-stream in John 6.
One part is literal and one part is metaphysical.
I've asked other Roman Catholics if they get hungry or thirsty.
In John 6 He said you wouldn't get hungry or thirsty. RCs try to spiritualize these questions while then turning around and trying to hold to a literal rendering of the remaining passage all the while negating the beginning of the passage where Christ speaks of the necessity of believing in Him.
That's how He opened the discussion with the Jews.
26Jesus answered them and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. 27“Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.” 28Therefore they said to Him, “What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?” 29Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.
*****
They don't understand what He's saying. They, like Roman Catholicism, thinks He's discussing actual bread. The unbelieving Jews and Roman Catholicism have made the same error.
30So they said to Him, “What then do You do for a sign, so that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? 31“Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘HE GAVE THEM BREAD OUT OF HEAVEN TO EAT.’” 32Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. 33“For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.” 34Then they said to Him, “Lord, always give us this bread.
*****
In this passage Jesus identifies Himself as the bread of life. He also promises eternal life to those who believe; He will lose none that the Father gives Him...it's a clear statement of the security of the believer...which Roman Catholicism denies.
35Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.
36“But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37“All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. 38“For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39“This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40“For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”
*****
As noted before Paul recorded exactly what he received from the Lord....and it did not include transubstantiation.
It's not about salvation as one must already be a believer to participate in the Lord's Supper.
We do this to proclaim His death until He comes. The text is crystal clear.
"26For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes." 1 Cor 11:26 NASB
I can see that you are having trouble understanding the Gospel about what Jesus says ‘to eat and drink His Body and Blood”. You pick and choose what you want and lack understanding of God’s message.
Earthly food perishes. So they came for earthly food and not the Bread of Life.
If one comes to Jesus as the Bread of life, one will not hunger or thirst for earthly life. Do you think you will be hungry or thirsty in eternal life with God?
Jesus Body and Blood (Divine supernatural life) when eaten and drank worthily leads to eternal life with God. Jesus is speaking literally and sacramentally.
Your comments:
As noted before Paul recorded exactly what he received from the Lord....and it did not include transubstantiation.
It’s not about salvation as one must already be a believer to participate in the Lord’s Supper.
Jesus told us to eat and drink for eternal life (salvation). Paul does not need to repeat it. You reject what Jesus taught and the Apostles shared with Catholics for the last 2000 years.
Jesus told us many things for our salvation:
Sacraments of, Baptism, Confirmation, Confession, Eucharist (Mass), Anointing of Sick, Marriage and Holy Orders.
His Commandments
Die in the state of grace
Belief in all His Words (Truth)
The virtues of Faith, Hope and Charity
Perhaps you should define what you mean by having faith?
This is the only passage with this.
Rome has taken it completely out of context in relation to the rest of the NT.
If one comes to Jesus as the Bread of life, one will not hunger or thirst for earthly life. Do you think you will be hungry or thirsty in eternal life with God?
Now see what you did....you have to read back into the passage what you want it to mean. IF your exegesis is consistent you'd have to answer in the affirmative to my questions of becoming hungry or thirsty.
I notice also you ignored the passage dealing with the necessity of believing in Him....which is very consistent in John and the NT.
In all of the encounters Jesus had with people this is the only one that eating/drinking is mentioned and it was the unbelieving Jews who didn't understand His message.
They, like Rome, believed He was talking about literal eating/drinking....but the overall context of the passage and NT negates that understanding.
IF Rome's understanding of the passage is correct, that would be the consistent message of the NT....yet that is not witnessed in the NT.
When Jesus met the woman at the well, He did not tell her to have the Lord's Supper.
When Peter and the disciples preached at Pentecost they did not instruct them to participate in the Lord's Supper for salvation.
Jesus told us many things for our salvation: Sacraments of, Baptism, Confirmation, Confession, Eucharist (Mass), Anointing of Sick, Marriage and Holy Orders.
Not one of those deals with salvation.
Not. One.
That's Rome's version of things which as demonstrated, is incorrect....IF one reads the NT in context and not isolation as Rome does.
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.