Replies

Jesus did not merely come and make an outward appearance as a man, he became a man. The Word became Flesh and dwelt among us. Your analogy is somewhat akin to Gnosticism which claimed that Jesus really didn't have a body of flesh, he just took on the appearance of having a body of flesh. I think you may wish to reconsider your comments.

Yes, the language is sloppy to say Jesus took on the "appearances" of man. I grant you that.

But you know we know what the Incarnation is all about and our Christology is solid. So address the issue I outlined in my last post.

If you can grant that things may not be what they appear, then you can grant that transubstantiation is a possiblity. The substance of Jesus was not what the accidents (better word than appearance for this argument)would have you believe.

I think your analogy of Jesus becoming flesh and bread becoming flesh becoming Jesus breaks down do the fact when Jesus was here on earth He was who He said He was, the Son of God. When He was conceived He was God. When He was born He was God. When He lived here He was God. When He died in the flesh and was resurrected in the glorified flesh He was God. There was no mystical change in His person nor was there one when the Lord's Supper was instituted. For the elements to be changed into His actual flesh and blood would have been a gross violation of the Mosaic law that even Paul and the Jerusalem Council did not countermand in the letter to the Galatian churches.

If you can grant that things may not be what they appear, then you can grant that transubstantiation is a possiblity.

Transubstantiation is a possibility and I suppose so is the idea that Jesus was made of bread. The problem is that all evidence points to the fact that no "transubstantiation" takes place and that from a physical standpoint the bread starts out as bread and ends up as bread and nothing physical occurs to change it.

Your idea that things may not seem as they appear brings up an interesting premise. The earth appears to be 6 Billion years old, but the bible states that it was created about 6000 years ago in six days. Yet most Catholics scoff at the idea that God literally created the universe in 6 days, yet they buy into the idea that the bread is really flesh despite the fact that by all appearances it is nothing more than bread.

Why can't you guys buy into a 6 day creation if you so readily accept that something that is by all "appearances" bread is really human flesh?