Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And I suppose you believe that you understand the Apostles words better than Protestants.
Sorry Nate, but neither the Apostles or those who heard them ever knew about a priesthood separate from all other Christians who performed the ritual of transubstantiation. In fact, they never heard the word transubstantiation. It was never used until the eleventh century. Another invention of the RCC.
No,not me. The early church that the Apostles trained , as I clearly stated. Lets recap. All the churches that can trace the succession of their bishops back to the Apostles teach the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. ALL of them. The RCC, the EO, the OO, the Lutherans, all of them. Most didnt call it transsubstantiation, that term was invented by the RCC to try and explain the process, but all of them , IF one bothers to research them, teach that Christs body is physically present in the Eucharist. That the word wasn't created until later doesn't alter what the Apostles and the early church taught. I gave link to a bishop in 110AD,Ignatius of Antioch (Bishop of the Antioch church), proclaiming this, if you bothered to read what was written. So either the Apostles and the first bishops they trained misunderstood Jesus, or Protestants today misunderstand Jesus. Should we believe the Protestants who have broken into 10,000 plus sects because each group thinks IT is the one who has interpreted the Bible properly, or Ignatius of Antioch, who was a Christian bishop one generation after Christ? Martin Luther, who broke with Rome but retained the belief in the Real Presence, or Miss Kate?
Somehow I'm not betting on Protestants a thousand plus years after Christ , reading a Bible in their own language that is translated from the Hebrew or Greek ,which in turned recorded what Jesus said in Aramaic, to know better what Jesus meant than the actual Apostles who heard the words come out of his mouth and continued to train under Jesus even after this. I think that is the height of arrogance . But its what you do. The very formation of the early church is evidence against your belief, but you evidently believe you are smarter than them .
Good luck with that
Edited to add. This didn't occur to me until just now, but the Ignatius of Antioch I quoted proclaiming that the Eucharist is actually the physical body of Christ was a direct disciple and student of one of the 12 Apostles. Care to guess which one? John. Yep, the John that wrote the Gospel of John . So, in your view, you know more about what Christ meant than the early father of the church who learned from the guy who wrote the Gospel of John we are debating. . Yes ma'am, that is correct. You are disputing with a disciple of the Apostle John that you know better about what Christ meant than the guy that was directly trained by the writer of the Gospel of John .
As I said, good luck with that
Last edited by NatesDude; 11-16-2021 at 11:18 AM..
I was a child of about five sitting in a Baptist church with my parents overseas and oh how I wanted to take communion with everyone else! I wanted it SO BADLY. So I was wiggling around on my mother's lap and begging her, and probably to get me to just shut up in church, she let me take a little cup of Welch's grape juice, which I promptly spilled all over my white tights.
I remember thinking clearly, "I am not ready for this yet."
That was more true than I could even imagine at the time.
Because he would not be human if that is the case.
How can you place limits on God? How can you possibly claim to know what a glorified and immortal human body is capable of, especially when it's the Body of Christ Himself?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
It's either his flesh, or it isn't. And it can't be in both places at one time.
In John 15:1 Jesus said he was a vine. He had leaves growing out of his arms and ears.
So since Jesus said he was a gate, a lamb, and a vine, all of these must be taken literally. Yeah, right. It's symbolism you bunch of cannibals.
But the symbolism itself does have meaning regarding the “unseen” “invisible” things
Jesus is the word/logos of God, which has to do with what goes alongside and with the bread/wine of communion which is the preaching/songs/doctrines
The Word Became Flesh
Joh 1:1**In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2**The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3**All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Joh 1:4**In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
Joh 1:5**And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
Joh 1:6**There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
G3056***(Strong)
λόγος
logos
log'-os
From G3004; something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension a computation; specifically (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (that is, Christ): - account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say (-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.
So Jesus let disciples leave rather than correct their misunderstanding ? And the disciple of the guy that wrote the Gospel didn't understand what his mentor that wrote the Gospel meant?
What do you NOT understand about the situation Jesus faced trying to communicate spiritual things to His carnal Apostles who were terrified of SPIRITS???
1st Corinthians 3:2-3 (NKJV) I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able; for you are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?
What do you NOT understand about the situation Jesus faced trying to communicate spiritual things to His carnal Apostles who were terrified of SPIRITS???
1st Corinthians 3:2-3 (NKJV) I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able; for you are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?
No offense, but I am not interested in your interpretation . This line of questioning is directed at those that take the Bible as literal truth . Which is why I say I am not interested . Not dissing you, but the point pertains to those who take the Bible literally or mostly so .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My thoughts exactly
