Testimony of a Former Irish Priest

BereanBeacon.Org ^ | Richard Peter Bennett

[Cronos]

Have you been thirsty or hungry since you last ate Jesus???

Ate OF... we are God's machine, built to run on HIM, on GOD, spiritual.

We do not thirst or hunger spiritually when we have God.

Those who do not get to partake of Christ, hunger and thirst all their lives and this shows in their actions...

[Cronos]

You forget what HE said

John 6:30 takes place in the synagogue at Capernaum. The Jews asked Jesus what sign he could perform so that they might believe in him. As a challenge, they noted that "our ancestors ate manna in the desert."

Jesus then told them the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. "Give us this bread always," they said. Jesus replied, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst." At this point the Jews thought, just like many protestants that HE was speaking metaphorically.

He then repeated "I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."

The Jews then argued among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52).

His listeners were stunned because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–56).

In John 6:60 we read: "Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’" These were his disciples, people used to his remarkable ways. He warned them not to think of flesh, but spiritually: "It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life" (John 6:63; cf. 1 Cor. 2:12–14).

But some did not believe."After this, many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him" (John 6:66).

Here some followers left Him because of what HE said (perhaps even Judas). If it had all been a misunderstanding, if they erred in taking a metaphor in a literal sense, why didn’t he call them back and say 'no, you misunderstood me, I meant a symbol'? Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood." John 6 was an extended promise of what would be instituted at the Last Supper—and it was a promise that could not be more explicit. Or so it would seem to a Catholic/Orthodox

Paul also said, "Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself" (1 Cor. 11:27, 29).

[Cronos]

So then you do believe that God dealth with and communicated with John Smith, John Smyth, Zwingli, Michael servetus, John Calvin, Wesley, Benny Hinn, Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyers, David Koresh, Mary Baker Eddy?

[Cronos]

actually, no. I would refer to the EO as being part of the ONE Apostolic Church.

[Cronos]

If that's the case, then why not teach that Jesus was made from bread, like the Pillsbury Dough boy?

Because:
1. The bread and wine are transformed into the true body and blood of Christ, these are no longer bread
2. Jesus taught what He taught, and The Church retains it -- if you wish to change this, you can of course form your own non-Christian religion like the Mormons.

And, if Jesus refers to wine in separate places as something else, to construe this as being the same as where He EXPLICITLY refers to the wine at the Last Supper as His blood, is normal excerption practised by those outside The Church

of course, Jesus too knew the Law -- I dare say it better than you. Why does He explicitly tell His disciples to eat His flesh and drink His blood? Why does He not correct this when many leave Him? Because He knew what He was referring to -- His spiritual body and blood which is "fuel" for mankind

And, of course, you repeat the old canard. Christ is NOT sacrificed daily at the mass. Christ's sacrifice was a one-time event in space and time. That is and has always been Church teaching.

[Cronos]

again, standard excerption — instead of reading The Bible as a whole, the non-Church view is to excerpt. Remember that God works not as either-or but as AND.

[Cronos]

oh, and of course you use the same argument for the very similar argument used by Gamecock (copied by Wagglebee into this post I think), protesting the same from a non-Church perspective, right?

[Cronos]

And, as I said the Beatitudes were read in the Apostolic Church long before any of the groupings that call themselves Protestant or Baptist or PEnt-e-costal were even a thought in their human creator's heads. In fact, these groupings and sub-sub-groupings and further splinter cells took the Bible, the beatitudes, all the little good stuff that is in them, from The Church. They got the bad stuff from their own flawed interpretations.

These groupings are inherently flawed, that's why they split so many times, split-split-split.

[Cronos]

Metmon: John 6:[50] This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die. [51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [52] If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. I wonder how many Catholics had died even having eaten Communion?

Ah, so now the view of this grouping or sub-grouping of Protestants is to doubt Christ when He says that any who eat of Christ shall live forever?

Which other verses do you disagree with in the Bible? Or does the excerpted book of which sub-sub-grouping cut out the books and verses that it disagrees with?

Christ specifically says that

John 6:[50] This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die. [51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [52] If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.

--> If you partake of this Eucharist, you will NOT die a spiritual death. Christ IS the living bread come down from heaven. Just as manna satisfied the HEbrews preventing their mortal death, so too Christ is the manna that saves us from spiritual death.

[Cronos]

The Church is the instrument of God, taught by The Son, protected by The Father and graced by The Holy Spirit. Protestant groupings took all the good stuff that is in them from The Church which is the instrument of God

[Cronos]

Dr. eckleburg has stated that she do not like kneeling, statues, incense, altars.

that she would go to any Protestant group, but not to a Church that looks like the one above, where they have the Eucharist, have icons, the Crucific, etc.

Hence ergo, she would not go to a Lutheran Church -- correct?

What about you, Reggie old boy? Would you agree with the good Doctor that you would not worship in a Church that has the Eucharist, icons, the Crucifix?

[Cronos]

Though, of course, these aren't brethern except in very loose terms. Some of you believe that Justification cannot be lost. Some Protestants believe that it can be lost based on sin. In basic soteriology, you have considerable differences. In practise, there are substantial differences. In BELIEF there are substantial differences.

All the groups you belong to may say sola scriptura, but each interprets the beliefs of those separately and distinctly. Each has a different concept of Justification, of Salvation, of Redemption and many have share those beliefs (especially Pentecostals, Lutherans, Anglicans, MEthodists, non-Calvinist Baptists etc.) with The Church

There is no unifying factor -- especially since much of the Protestant world outside the ones faithful to Apostolic teachigns (Traditional Lutheran and Anglicans) are as way out there as the Seventh Day Adventists, Christian Scientists, Presbyterians, etc.

[Cronos]

Following the teachings of Christ is the way to salvation and those teachings are taught and passed down in the Apostolic Church. if one’s sub-sect of a sub-sect sees itself as having no common Gospel with The Church, then it falls into the same category as Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc. — outside Christ’s Church and not Christian.

[Cronos]

Nah, God's grace protects The Church, as it has protected us for 2000 years, since the teachings of Christ passed down by His Apostles.

In those 2000 years we've seen off many heresies, from Arians to Montanists to Marcionites and now the first gen Protestant groupings die out. The 3rd generation Baptist grouping was started in the 1600s, so it may stick around for about another century or so before it too dies out, while the 5th and 6th gen Protestant groups like the OPC, BPC etc. seem to have shorter lives and die out quicker.

[Cronos]

That post was directed to boatbums as her grouping would have far more commonality with the Apostolic Church than with those posters who deny the basic tenets encapsulated in the Creed. You have nothing in common with those who deny the divinity of Christ or who consider that Christ had only ONE nature or who consider that Christ was mortal but the spirit “took ahold of him” and then left him on the cross. With those groups and those posters, what commonality can you have?

[Cronos]

Protestants believe men are justified by the righteousness of Christ being imputed to them by the grace of God for His glory.

really -- do all of you say that, all the Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans, Methodists, Anabaptists, Presbyterians, Reformatted, Pent-e-costals, Word-of-Faith, Mennonites, Baptists, Wesleyans, Seventh Day Adventists, Christian Scientists, Congregationalists, etc?

[Cronos]

No, the MSM doesn’t understand enough to properly explain the phenomena

[don-o]

There ARE certain non-negotiable doctrines but we do NOT need to have every little detail spelled out for us.

Is the question of "eternal security" vs the belief that salvation is conditional a non-negotiable or a little detail?

[Cronos]

Protestants believe that baptism is NECESSARY for REMITTANCE OF SINS?

Check what Lutherans, Anglicans and Methodists believe in. The Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Methodist and Lutheran Churches teach that baptism is a sacrament that has actual spiritual and salvific effects. Don't club TRaditional Lutheran, Anglicans and Methodists with all the wacko sects like Seventh Day Adventists, Presbyterians in the USA etc.

[Cronos]

When the Vatican has crumbled to dust and ashes . . .

THE TRUTH WILL STILL BE STANDING IN THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH....