The Apostles didn't interpret scripture...They wrote it...And there are no apostolic successors...You're wrong on both counts...
2. Ignatius of Antioch (as a child, heard Apostle John) —
Another fable...
“they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”
The writings of Ignatius are forgeries...Any honest Catholic will admit that...
Conclusion: No argument for the “symbol only” theory gained any following among Christians for a 1000 years, and then only after an individualistic interpretation theory took hold in Germany under Luther that ran counter to Scripture: “The Church is the pillar of the truth.” (I Tim 3:15)
Luther put the bible into the common language so Catholics could actually read it...As they read the scriptures, they left your religion, just as they do now...
I like to see this kind of fire-spewing anti-Eucharist rant. That was me a few a years ago, before I converted. “To be deep into history is to cease to be Protestant” — John Henry Newman
So now you cling to the 'widsom' of a flaming homosexual Catholic...
Yer on a roll...
See post 51 for my reply. Assertions don’t make arguments. Otherwise, I’m happy you know so much about the early Christians and Newman. It takes several years to read through them (not counting the years to learn Greek and Latin).
For those who want to hear the early Christians in their own words, go here: http://www.ccel.org/fathers.html