Oh, hello Mr Martin, I was just wondering where you’d got to – did the pope tell you to say 10,000 hail marys?
Anyway, to business and ignoring your implication that the
Originally Posted by Father Thomas Martin
Yes, you say every part of the Bible should be taken literally (except, of course, the deuterocanonical books as well as the parts dealing with the Holy Eucharist)
deuterocanonical books are part of KJV1611, let us progress - We'll make a good Baptist of you yet!
The deuterocanonical books – you and I know that they are no more than pleasant folk tales expressing the sort of things that God might have done – simple wishful thinking by over-ardent followers. They also were somewhat more sinisterly used by the Vatican business conglomerate at the time of the upsurge of Protestantism. Coincidentally, the jesuits arrived on the scene at about the same time and there was a lot of burning… but that’s another story for another day.
The wine and the death cookie are yet another thing – I have explained at length the only understanding possible and will not repeat myself. On the other hand, the terms of your employment by the Vatican business conglomerate preclude you from expressing openly your actual knowledge that there is no change in either the bread or wine whatsoever. This, in itself, shows that it is, allegorical – symbolic if you will.
Have you ever read Shakespeare? Hamlet, Act I, Scene iii, Polonius to Laertes "This above all: to thine own self be true."
However, if you are able to supply to Landover Christian University Research Department samples of allegedly transubstantiated flesh or blood, we will be happy to examine the sample.
Or perhaps you will claim that Jesus consisted of bread and wine?