[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

Apparently you have been led astray by Satan. You are always welcome back to the Church. This is something you have to decide for yourself.

I'm not sure what you think "Church" means but even the most ardent idolator.—.a moon worshipper, say.—.upon reading The Bible would understand its position on carved (or molten) images. They would not agree, they would say they followed some other inspiration, they would gawp at the moon and put little moons up and elevate body parts in its general direction and whatnot. You see, they don't claim to be following Jesus. They don't use the word "Church" at all. I know what they. mean.

What do you. mean?

John 14:15 If ye love me [Jesus speaking] keep my commandments.

[tomdstone]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

They don't use the word "Church" at all.

Matthew 16:18 King James Bible
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

Yes, we all know that Jesus used the word "Church" and although you didn't mention this, we know the difference between Πετρος and πετρα too. For example in the following passage

I Corinthians 10:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

it's made clear that the foundational rock is Christ - unless you were suggesting that Peter was alive as a free agent during The Exodus?

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

Sister Mitza, I don't think Mr Tombstone reads posts in their entirety. What seems to have happened is that he looked at your previous post and saw:

They don't use the word "Church" at all.

Now, conveniently disregarding the remainder of your post meant that he failed to establish the antecedent of the third-person-plural pronoun and thus came up with his nonsense. He will probably claim to have one of those so-called "attention decificient disorders", aka "too idle to pay attention".

[tomdstone]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

Sister Mitza, I don't think Mr Tombstone reads posts in their entirety.

I was going to say the same about you and your colleagues who claim to be Bible fearing Christians who take the holy Scriptures literally. But it is obvious that you have problems with the following passages concerning the Catholic teaching on the Eucharist:
Matthew 26:26-28: Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is my body." And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
Also see John 6:
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 disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" So Jesus said to them, "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. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever."

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

Yes. When Rome looks to reify its myths by fabricating a history backwards through some very dubious characters, supposedly arriving at "Peter," then claiming certain words in The Bible mean things they could never have implied at the time, it saddens me.

Some things are not implicit, however. They are explicit. Eucharistic theology is an obvious human invention because it contradicts the explicit words of Christ. When questioned about heavenly foodstuffs, Jesus differentiated manna provided in the desert from what He provided. In the following quotes I will refer to the popish Jerusalem Bible; by preempting claims that we misunderstand what Jesus said, papist dogma can be refuted from its own sources.

John 6 Jerusalem Bible ©1966
31-33 'Our fathers had manna to eat in the desert; as scripture says: He gave them bread from heaven to eat.' Jesus answered: 'I tell you most solemnly, it was not Moses who gave you bread from heaven, it is my Father who gives you the bread from heaven, the true bread; for the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.'
34-35 'Sir,' they said 'give us that bread always.' Jesus answered: 'I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never be hungry; he who believes in me will never thirst.'

Jesus knew that people would. misunderstand Him, in particular by confusing mundane food taken in at the mouth with Spiritual food consumed by the heart. The explanation is really quite obvious but it's spelled out by Jesus anyway.

Jerusalem Bible ©1966
49-51 'Your fathers ate the manna in the desert and they are dead; but this is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that a man may eat it and not die. I am the living bread which has come down from heaven. Anyone who eats this bread will live for ever; and the bread that I shall give is my flesh, for the life of the world.'

The life of the world sustained by the Word of God is not the same as an individual life sustained by oral consumption of foodstuffs whether supplied from Heaven as the manna was or supplied by your local farmer. Catholicism should have paid more attention to recorded statements from Jesus when cobbling together its doctrines - or were those records not available? If the tenets they relied on came from already established ideas involving Queens of Heaven. or Spirits of the Corn and Wild. together with abundant sorceries and idols what would we expect to see? For their doctrines to be so wholly opposed to anything in The Bible, the veriest epitome of everything God condemns, it can only be a case of cramming what they already had under a new catholic. umbrella. That would explain why it's called Roman. catholicism and also why it's so obviously pagan. The question of flesh is addressed by Jesus as follows:

Jerusalem Bible ©1966
63-64a 'It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh has nothing to offer. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. 'But there are some of you who do not believe.'
66 After this, many of his disciples left him and stopped going with him.

KJV for comparison
John 6:31-35
John 6:49-51
John 6:63-66
WHOLE CHAPTER

[tomdstone]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

You are almost there. Continue reading John 6.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

Mark 14:36 And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.

John 18:11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

Jerusalem Bible ©1966 for comparison

Mark 14:36 'Abba (Father)!' he said 'Everything is possible for you. Take this cup away from me. But let it be as you, not I, would have it.'

John 18:11 Jesus said to Peter, 'Put your sword back in its scabbard; am I not to drink the cup that the Father has given me?'

The point which seems to escape you is that people who thought Christ required them to eat His actual. flesh were mistaken. Many of then stopped following Him and took up paganism or something. Whatever. At any rate, they did not become Christians. The whole point is that whereas eating flesh (or bread) sustains the body for a short time, what Christ offers belongs to a different category. Pagans would not understand that. Jews didn't understand either.

It is possible for a literal record of statements made as a matter of historical fact to include statements that were similes or parables. Very often it's stated to be so. In this case we have Jesus describing His ordeal as "a cup" which He'd prefer not to undergo. Nevertheless, He drank that cup. Are you going to say that rather than be crucified He climbed into a goblet and drowned Himself? Of course not. "The Cup" He's referring to is a different category of cup.


Now that you understand that, how would you read the following passage?

I Corinthians 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

I Corinthians 11:25 In the same way he took the cup after supper, and said, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Whenever you drink it, do this as a memorial of me.'

The cup which Jesus held was just an ordinary cup. The bread was ordinary bread. The efficacy of "the cup" He accepted in making the sacrifice He made did not involve drinking anything (although He did have some vinegar) and the thing He asks us to do is not a ritual of sorcery with blood and demons but a memorial.—.as rendered in your own Jerusalem Bible.—.which means something done in rememberance of what He undertook on our behalf. The Bible is so straightforward on this topic I fail to see how anyone could think otherwise.

[tomdstone]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

The Bible is so straightforward on this topic I fail to see how anyone could think otherwise.

I can give you the citations from Scripture:

John 6:51-57

Matthew 26:26-28

You will have to decide for yourself what these passages are saying. Catholics see it as confirming their teaching on the Holy Eucharist.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

Got that. You're calling Jesus Christ a liar and claiming that He left His work unfinished.

[Phil Ander]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

[/INDENT]

I can give you the citations from Scripture:

John 6:51-57

Matthew 26:26-28

You will have to decide for yourself what these passages are saying. Catholics see it as confirming their teaching on the Holy Eucharist.

There was one specific situation where Jesus said this to His close followers. A one time event.


He never intended that this become some sort of perpetual franchise opportunity for the corrupt catholic church.


Phil

[tomdstone]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

There was one specific situation where Jesus said this to His close followers. A one time event.


He never intended that this become some sort of perpetual franchise opportunity for the corrupt catholic church.


Phil

You are forgetting about:
Luke 22:19 Do this in memory of Me.
and
Matthew 28:20 Be sure of this. I am with you always even unto the end of the world.
I don't see how the Last Supper could be a one time event if Jesus said to Do this in memory of Me? The Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches have the apostolic succession. Jesus is with His Church until the end of time.

[Basilissa]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

I can give you the citations from Scripture:

John 6:51-57

Matthew 26:26-28

You will have to decide for yourself what these passages are saying. Catholics see it as confirming their teaching on the Holy Eucharist.

Oh dear. Please let me direct you to our own Statement of Faith here on this very website. I have highlighted the most relevant part:

The Lord’s Supper is a symbolic act of obedience whereby members memorialize the death of the Redeemer and anticipate His Second Coming. In the Lord’s Supper, the wine remains wine, and the bread remains bread. Claims by the Whore of Babylon to any miracle of transubtantiation are of Satan and designed by The Lord of the Flies and broadcast by his earthly minion, the vicar of Rome, to mislead.
* No broad hems or phylacteries allowed.
Matthew 3:13-17; 26:26-30; 28:19-20; Mark 1:9-11; 14:22-26; Luke 3:21-22; 22:19-20; John 3:23; Acts 2:41-42; 8:35-39; 16:30-33; 20:7; Romans 6:3-5; 1 Corinthians 10:16,21; 11:23-29; Colossians 2:12.

I hope this was helpful.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

You are forgetting about:
Luke 22:19 Do this in memory of Me.
and
Matthew 28:20 Be sure of this. I am with you always even unto the end of the world.
I don't see how the Last Supper could be a one time event if Jesus said to Do this in memory of Me? The Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches have the apostolic succession. Jesus is with His Church until the end of time.

That's right. It's a remembrance. Not something extra due to what Jesus did, the thing He asked us to remember, being insufficient.

Luke 22:19-20 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

Do what in remembrance? The thing Jesus was doing when He said "do this."

What was Jesus doing? Breaking bread. No mention of the bread turning into flesh or the wine into blood. Someone would have noticed.

What Jesus took the word "cup" to signify has already been covered so it's not up to anyone to decide anything. Jesus has told us. Thank you for contributing to the thread, it's been a blessing to share Christ's words with you.

[tomdstone]

Re: Question for Catholics about the eucharist

I hope this was helpful.

Yes. It was helpful for me to understand your position. However, I believe that your interpretation may be in error because of the passages I already quoted and the fact that you take the Bible literally.

John 6:51-57

Matthew 26:26-28

Luke 22:19

Matthew 28:20

From these passages, it seems to me that the Bible confirms the Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox teaching. But you are going to have to decide for yourself.