Replies

From the catholic quick answers to which FortySeven linked, the very proof text used by the 'catholic answers' contradicts the very point it tries to foist later:

Mark 7:18 And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, 19 because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?"[ Jesus declared that what goes in the mouth is going in the mouth, not into the soul. But the catholic twist is made, anyway. Jesus also taught that the eye can allow 'things' into the soul, and thus what is allowed into the eyegate can defile the soul. Committing sacrilege, committing an act which is against a command from God, can also defile the soul, because it is done by faith that this defiance must be accepted by God as sacred.]

That passage from Mark is used to fabricate mumbo jumbo. The followup passage from the 'wise' catholic answers should be seen in the light of the proof text scrabbled for use above:

Third, the Old Testament is very specific about why one was not to eat blood: "The life of every creature is the blood of it; therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood" (Lv 17:14, cf. Dt 12:23). The Israelites could not eat animal blood because it contained the animal's life, but there is one Person whose life you must have in you, "Christ who is your life" (Col 3:4).

Now readers can see why some are declaring catholicism is a false religion, for these catholic answers show that the religion has not a clue how GOD'S LIFE GETS INTO A CHRISTIAN! The Holy SPirit at Pentecost came INTO the listeners who received the Word with repentence. They didn't eat Jesus and drink His blood to get Holy Spirit life in them!

But wait, there's more mystery religion mumbo jumbo!

This supposed wise source of catholic dogma goes down the same heresy drain hole it created:

Finally, even if the Jehovah's Witnesses were right that drinking blood were intrinsically evil instead of the subject of a temporary prohibition, they would still have problems with John 6 because, in their interpretation, Jesus would be commanding us to eat his flesh symbolically and to drink his blood symbolically. He would be commanding us to act out symbolically an intrinsically evil deed as part of a sacred worship service. But this leads us to a ludicrous conclusion, so it must be that drinking Christ's blood is permissible (not to say desirable).

Because the author of the tripe is so twisted in thinking, it goes after the Passover Feast which included four cups of wine drunk in remembrance, as symbolic foreshadowing of realities. Though I am in no way a Jehovah's Witness, I join with their objection to the catholic mystery religion assertion that catholics should drink the literal blood of Jesus! THAT IS sacrilege taught as sacred. That is a form of blasphemy.

Catholic answers twist the seeker into pretzels so the only hope they appear to have is to just trust the priests of the mystery religion for their welfare. God forbide! The above 'catholic answers' teaching is an example of double talk used when the author had not a clue to the coming of God's Life into the believing/faithing person. Do readers really accept the teaching from catholicism that you must drink Christ's literal blood to have God's life in you? Or do readers believe the sacred ceremony of symbolically drinking the wine and breaking and eating the bread is an fiath affirmation of the sacrifice He made for us? The symbolic affirmation is exactly what Passover is all about! In fact, it is what all the Feasts, the Times of God, are about. Symbolism focusing the soul/spirit upon the Grace of God.