Then, to put things frankly, why bother to be a Christian? According to your thesis, it is manifestly clear that Christianity is a false religion!
Why? For 1500 years, the only Christian understanding regarding the Eucharist was that it is literally the Body and Blood of Christ under the "appearance" of bread and wine. If this is NT true, then Christianity must be false, because a sovereign God would NEVER allow the "corruption" of such an important doctrinal point to occur from the beginning and continue uncorrected for 1500 years! If you believe such to be the case, you either have ZERO understanding of the concept of Divine Providence, or you are totally wasting your time believing a religion that cannot POSSIBLY be worshipping the True God.
On the other hand, IF this understanding about the literal transubstantiation of the bread and wine to Christ's Body and Blood IS true, then there is internal consistency that does NOT violate a necessary application of Divine Providence, Christianity IS true, and we do well to follow Christ as the Son of God. I pray you will ruminate on this, and not just blow it off.
Christianity is Following The Lord Jesus Christ and maintaining a relationship with Him by picking up your cross (crucifying your flesh so you can walk in His Spirit, thereby being victorious daily in your life here on earth.)
God would NEVER allow the "corruption"
Oh but He most certainly did just as illustrated many times in His Word. The very fact that God sent His only Son to earth was to straighten everything out. Who do you think He was up against other than the Devil....The Priests!
Man will always be corruptable, because of the flesh
There's a difference in putting your trust in man and putting your trust in God. Eve trusted the serpent instead of God. Adam trusted Eve instead of taking God's Word to heart. According to your tone, you are rejecting God's Word in favor of holding on to a system. Anyhow, as in your words, is 1500 years running. The Word says we are but a vapor in time and a thousand years is but a day to God
Salvation is a "change", not a gradual process of "changing" because the only possible provision for the "change" was already made at a specific point in time, long ago at Calvary's Cross! The idea of "Process Theology" actually has it roots from a Grecian philosopher named Heraclites who viewed reality in terms of "becoming" rather than "being". Heraclites claimed that "...the basis of reality was change and flux." In past times, Catholics have primarily focused on the traditional "saving works" of the sacraments, the most important being the Mass, which perfectly demonstrates the theology of "process salvation" itself. The Mass constitutes the perpetual re-sacrificing of Christ as provision for a "process", while the Cross was the provision for a completed rebirth.
The re-killing of Christ in the Mass (since the Catholic Church teaches that the bread and wine turn into the literal Body and Blood of Christ, a.k.a. "transubstantiation") is a horrific work that the Catholic would not feel necessary to repeat if he or she believed that Faith in Jesus' one-time Sacrifice had been sufficient
So again...What is the object of your faith? Is it the Cross? or is it something else
Church actually means "Called out". All the Apostles were followers of Jesus Christ because He called them.
I grew up Catholic and went through 8 years of Catechism. Some of my family still call themselves Catholics. I certainly don't attempt anything other than reaching out to them in love. I just want them to know the depth of love the Lord Jesus Christ has for them. I pray that the eyes of your heart be enlightened, so that you would know, what is the hope of His Calling for you.
Jesus states: "You must be born again"
That is a straw-man Magisterium, you are offering a false set of choices , not a good debating technique.
The fact is that the proposition that Christ was PHYSICALLY present in the bread was not a universally held belief prior to the 9th century. It was debated at that time and not firmly decided until the 1300's and not an article of faith until the 1300's . It was made a mandatory doctrine by Trent demanded that it must be believed under penalty of a judgment of God.
It is interesting that even today many polls show only about 1/2 of Catholics actually believe it is the physical body and blood of Christ
If this is NT true, then Christianity must be false, because a sovereign God would NEVER allow the "corruption" of such an important doctrinal point to occur from the beginning and continue uncorrected for 1500 years! If you believe such to be the case, you either have ZERO understanding of the concept of Divine Providence, or you are totally wasting your time believing a religion that cannot POSSIBLY be worshipping the True God.
We are called to a correct reading of the scriptures, which would include reading the passages in context and having an understanding of the symbolism and cultural of the words spoken read and searching the scriptures for other passages that support the studied passage. That is why on a Sunday morning you see protestants with their bible opened reading along to make sure the text is being correctly presented. Simply repeating the words of another as fact is of no spiritual benefit to anyone.
Often we are mocked as believing in "Faith alone" yet every time a passage may only have the meaning ascribed to it by the Magisterium one is taking much more on Faith, because one is trusting other men and not the word of God
There is no evidence that the apostles or the disciples believed in transubstantiation or that the bread was the 'ACTUAL body' of Christ at the time the scriptures were written. Would you dare accuse Paul or Peter of not being "Christians"?
I would say I have a more complete understanding of the providence and sovereignty of God as a Calvinist than you would claim for yourself.
Can I ask you why Christ died? What was the purpose of the cross, and what effect did it have?