“I don’t know why it’s beyond the comprehension of some that they can know exactly what the RCC church teaches and STILL reject it.
There are former Catholics on board here who used to TEACH catechism classes.
We KNOW what Catholicism teaches and since it doesn’t line up with Scripture, we reject it.”
~ ~ ~
Hi, I am not sure, does this mean you were baptized Roman
Catholic?
It would be INSANITY to leave the faith if you understood
God is present in the most Holy Eucharist.
Private interpretation of Scripture is heresy. That’s why
our brothers and sisters pick a few verses in the Bible
and ignore the rest, they do not line up but conflict with
their private interpretation.
There is not one verse in the Bible, Old and New Testament
that conflicts with another when you follow the Church,
her interpretation of Scripture. God gave her the authority
to interpret the Bible. God did the same when the Church canonized Scripture.
Read the foot notes of the English version of the first
Bible, the footnotes will help you understand difficult verses and they are a help to understand why the Church teaches what she does.
I am a baptized Catholic and raised Catholic. I have extended family members who were priests and nuns.
It would be INSANITY to leave the faith if you understood God is present in the most Holy Eucharist.
Except that God is NOT present in the eucharist. Spiritual life is imparted by grace through faith, not through eating God. Spiritual life is not imparted to the believer by physical actions and works or ceremonies.
Scripture is more than clear on the prohibition of eating blood. IF the church were correct about that, then it would be insanity to leave but if they're not correct, then what they're teaching is heresy itself.
Passover was done in REMEMBRANCE of the first and actual Passover, it wasn't a re-enactment of it. In the Passover ceremony, the cup they drank was wine, not blood. The blood was NOT to be eaten.
As observant Jews, the disciples would not have drank the cup of the new covenant at what we call the Last Supper if they really thought it was actual blood. It would have made them ceremonially unclean for the observance of the Passover. And it would have been impossible for Jesus to break His own commandments against eating blood and demand that His disciples do it knowing it would cause them to sin.
Nor would Jesus have drank of the cup Himself because if it were indeed blood, then He would have sinned and become unclean and been incapable of being the perfect, spotless lamb.
Salvation by faith, simply believing, in Jesus own words.
John 6:28-29 Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.”
John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
I checked out the link you gave and found an interesting discrepancy in the translation of John 6:58 between the two links here.
At this link, http://bible.cc/john/6-58.htm
John 6:58 reads.....
Douay-Rheims Bible
“This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. “
At the link you gave me the D-R Bible translates it so....
http://www.drbo.org/chapter/50006.htm
[58] As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me.
A look at the Greek shows the first translation to be correct.
http://biblos.com/john/6-58.htm
I am afraid that I cannot find the D-R Bible trustworthy if such a cursory review of it shows this kind of translation discrepancy. This is far worse than anything the various Protestant versions are accused of.