Posted on 12/27/2008 6:02:01 PM PST by Steelfish
Compare this to the actual words of Jesus: "Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life within you."
Funny how you claim to go by the Bible, and end up directly contradicting it.
Funny how you claim to go by the Bible, and end up directly contradicting it.
1Co 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 1Co 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Jesus took an ordinary loaf of bread and thanked the Father for it...
Jesus then broke the bread...Jesus then passed the bread around...No special prayer...No hocus pocus...Jesus passed around real, broken bread...
Jesus then said, Eat, this is my body which is BROKEN FOR YOU...
The broken bread represents Jesus' broken body...Without the breaking of bread, the connection to the broken body of Jesus on the Cross is gone...
Jesus then say, Do this in remembrance of me...
WHAT??? If that bread was Jesus' flesh, how could you possibly not do it in remembrance of Jesus???
We have watchd Catholics on these boards claim they get the equivalent of a 'spiritual high' after they eat the wafer...After all, you're eating the flesh, blood, soul and divinity of the Lord...WHY would Jesus need to remind you to remember HIM when you eat it???
1Co 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
Same thing here...'You're drinking my blood...Don't forget to remember me when you drink my blood'...
And what happens when you eat the bread and drink the 'cup'??? Do you get filled with Jesus??? Do you get a spiritual awakening??? Do you get eternal life??? You just got eternal life yesterday when you did the same thing...You need it again today??? Of course the answer to these is no...So why do you do it??? You do it for a show...
Just like baptism...You do it for a show...
1Co 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come.
You do it to show the Lords death...You do it for communion (to show yourself and others that you are one, with Jesus Christ)...Like baptism, that you died, were buried and rose again, as Jesus did...
When you remember Jesus' torn body and his shed blood, for you, it nourishes your soul...
I agree!
No one is required to eat the flesh, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus to have eternal life...
John 6:53 Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
John 6:54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
Those are not my words, but the words of Jesus.
If you build your doctrine on a phrase, ‘eat my flesh’, you have to ignore what Jesus said in hundreds of other scriptures...
This doctrine of the Eucharist is based on scripture. Other doctrines are based on other scriptures. The thing of it is, Catholics follow ALL the teachings of Jesus, not just the ones we like.
If you are filled with the Holy Spirit, you have no need for the soul and divinity of Jesus...You have the presence of God already within you...
See above, John 6:53-54. I would agree with you but Jesus says otherwise and I follow Him.
Jesus said He sent the Holy Spirit in His place...
Yes He did; to inspire His Church and protect it from error, among other things. How does that negate what He said and did in John 6? Does Jesus contradict Himself elsewhere, or is this the only place?
Jesus said we have a Spiritual circumcision...Does that mean we have to have a physical circumcision but we apply it spiritually as well???
Sounds like you are referring to Baptism, another Catholic sacrament? No, Catholics believe that Baptism gives us the Holy Spirit; but you'll notice another "physical" element is involved- water! But no, physical circumcision is not necessary!
1 Cor 23 For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread,
24 and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, "This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me."
25 In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.
27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.
28 A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup.
29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.
So if they eat or drink (take communion) unworthily they will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord...
Sounds to me like Paul is agreeing with Jesus, not you!
Yes He did; to inspire His Church and protect it from error, among other things.
Among other things??? That's it???
It's pretty clear to me you don't know why the Holy Spirit took Jesus' place...And you clearly don't get the concept that God, in the form of the Holy Spirit indwells all born again Christians...
1Co 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
You can't get beyond John 6 and you think Peter is the one that built the Gentile Christian church even tho the scripure says otherwise...
1Co 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
And in view of that, a conversation with you about Holy Scirpture is impossible...
The broken bread represents Jesus' broken body
He didn't say "this represents my body," he said, "this is my body". "Touto estin soma mou" ... "this is the body of me".
That is how everyone understood it for 1500 years, until Zwingli decided to edit the words of the Lord and change them to accord with his -- Zwingli's -- teaching. When you claim that Jesus meant "this represents my body," you're repeating Zwingli's "improvement" on the words of Scripture. It isn't the Word of God anymore, but the word of Zwingli.
Even Martin Luther knew this was wrong. He was so angry when he discussed it with Zwingli that he carved "Hoc est enim corpus meum" (the Latin equivalent of "Touto estin soma mou") into the table with a knife.
You do it for a show...
Maybe you do. I certainly don't.
Incidentally, the "ordinary loaf" of bread which Jesus took was a kosher-for-Passover matzoh, not an ordinary loaf of bread at all.
The broken bread represents Jesus' broken body
He didn't say "this represents my body," he said, "this is my body". "Touto estin soma mou" ... "this is the body of me".
Did Jesus say, 'I'm turning this bread into my flesh'??? Nope...You figure the apostles looked at that bread and said, hmmmm, it was bread a second ago, but now it's flesh...But it still looks like bread...
But they took Jesus' word for it that it was flesh...
And every time one of them picked up a piece of bread, it turned into the flesh of Jesus...And every time one of them got thirsty and pick up a cup of wine, it turned into the blood of Jesus...
Jesus never told anyone to say anything or do any thing...Never gave any prayer or formula...Just whenever you eat bread, it's my body...
Jesus said, This is my body which is broken for you...And His body wasn't yet broken...So what's that mean???
They weren't just eating Jesus' body...They were eating his broken body...Jesus did NOT say This is my body which WILL be broken for you...So the emphasis is on the broken...For broken body...
The apostles knew they were eating bread...Can't figure out how you don't know it...
That is how everyone understood it for 1500 years, until Zwingli decided to edit the words of the Lord and change them to accord with his -- Zwingli's -- teaching. When you claim that Jesus meant "this represents my body," you're repeating Zwingli's "improvement" on the words of Scripture. It isn't the Word of God anymore, but the word of Zwingli.
Never read anything by Zwingli...But I read the Greek word used for 'body'...
G4983
σῶμα
sōma
so'-mah
From G4982; the body (as a sound whole), used in a very wide application, literally or figuratively: - bodily, body, slave.
Body can be used literally or figuratively...So your argument is far from being cut and dried...
You do it for a show...
Maybe you do. I certainly don't.
Why not??? That's what God says to do...
Yeah that's it. For someone who cannot understand "Eat my body/drink my blood", there is no way we're going to agree on the Holy Spirit, what He does and Who He resides in. So I'm not even going to go down that road.
Catholics believe ALL scripture. We do not pick and choose those that fit our preconceived notions, or the notions of Luther, Calvin, or Smith. We belong to the Church founded almost 2000 years ago by Jesus Himself, which He said He would be with until the end of the world.
And in view of that, a conversation with you about Holy Scirpture is impossible...
Yeah, you are probably right about that. When you get to a passage that does not fit your idea of what Jesus should be, you ignore it, throw it out, try to explain it away, change the subject, and finally, say it's impossible!
You were the one that wanted the scriptural basis of the Eucharist; I gave it to you; you don't accept it. But it's still there.
Since you want to bring Peter into it, (the first Pope!) I'll leave you with his words:
2nd Peter 1:20-21 Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.
2nd Peter 3:14-18: Therefore, beloved, since you await these things, be eager to be found without spot or blemish before him, at peace. And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures. Therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, be on your guard not to be led into the error of the unprincipled and to fall from your own stability. But grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory now and to the day of eternity.
So you believe that each individual non-Catholic Christian that has been "born again" is uniquely inspired by the Holy Spirit to interpret scripture in their own way... some say drinking is immoral, while others say it is fine if not to excess; some say homosexual behavior is wrong, others say it is not; some say abortion is wrong, others not. Are they not, as born again Christians, all claiming the unerring Word of God for their authority? How can they believe different things about it? Why did Jesus spend 3 years preaching and teaching if we can believe whatever we want?
And the one Church that Jesus founded is the only one that has lost it's way! It put the New Testament together, copied it down through the ages, but until Luther came along, there was no true Christian people? Jesus was a liar then, as He promised at the end of the Gospel of Matthew "and behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age".
Nope...Those who actually believe every word of the scriptures pretty much agree on everything...Those who don't, change a word here, a sentence there, you know, like the Catholic church does...
Catholics believe ALL scripture.
Sure you do...You just don't know what it says...You just can not discern the spiritual from the literal to the allegorical...Like Eusibius and his mentor said, It's all allegorical, except Eat My Flesh...
You guys think the more intellectual one is the more he knows about scripture...
We do not pick and choose those that fit our preconceived notions,
Of course you do...Your church is founded on a handful of scriptures, taken out of context...
Where the text says keys, you say power...Where it says water, you say baptism...And where it says baptism, you say water...And when it comes to the verse where John says I baptize with water, but HE will baptize with the Holy Ghost, You guys can't even discuss the verse...You don't have a clue...
Where it says millenium, you guys say, a very long time...LOL...Where it says Heaven, you say God...The list is endless...But you believe the scriptures, eh??? Only after you change them...
"pretty much"? So the difference between Lutherans, Baptists, Anglicans, etc... Do they not have doctrinal differences? I am no expert in the various Protestant denominations, but I've heard that some claim drinking alcohol is sinful, while others do not. I know there are people calling themselves Christian that claim the same inspiration of the Holy Spirit that tell me homosexual activity is ok, and that abortion is an acceptable practice. I've heard some famous Protestant ministers preach against these very acts as sinful. Who is right? They both claim inspiration of the Spirit? Does the Holy Spirit tell people different things?
Of course you do...Your church is founded on a handful of scriptures, taken out of context...
First, the Catholic Church is NOT founded on scripture; our Church is founded by and on Jesus Christ- Your scripture is a result of the efforts of the Catholic Church throughout the years, writing, collecting, protecting, preserving, and codifying it- under the direction of the Holy Spirit.
Second, it appears that you are admitting it is possible to take scripture out of context... to misinterpret it?
The question then is who is taking it out of context?
You might have memorized a lot of scripture, but as to what it all means, I'll go back to the original authorities... The apostles and their successors. To think you are somehow divinely inspired to recognize the truth, along with the other 30,000 who "pretty much agree on everything" is the height of arrogance.
This thread started out as a commentary about the Mass; you interjected a request for a scriptural basis; it was given. We disagree on that interpretation. I agree with the interpretation of the Church as it has been since the beginning; you agree with one that has been around for 500 years or so.
It has been said that Catholics enjoy the meal given us by our Lord almost 2000 years ago, while for the last 500 Protestants have been misreading the menu.
Excellent!
...oh I don’t think he had the combination rock concert and gong show that takes place at my church when he was writing that...
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.