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.
In your religious tradition, that's correct. The bread remains bread and is purely symbolic.
But in the Catholic Church, this is not so. Since the Catholic Church was founded by Christ and has been endowed with His Authority, the Priests act in persona Christi to truly change the elements from bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ.
The Catholic Church was not founded by Jesus. If he came back today he wouldn’t recognize the mess that the Catholics created.
Good point. The entire bible, in my opinion, is vague and the more it is read, the more questions that can be asked. Hence why I think it can be a bad thing to assert that one's own religious beliefs are 100% accurate.
I personally am not Catholic but I respect their beliefs and when I read the scripture of the Last Supper, Jesus literally states the bread is His body and the wine is His blood. What exactly does He mean by this? There's not much context. He could be saying the bread represents His body and the wine represents His blood, but the scripture does not say that. We have to do our best to interpret what he says either literally or non-literally and take our best guess as to what He meant.
Anyone that has the ability to read the Bible clearly understands that Jesus was using the bread and wine as symbols. He never stated that once you eat or drink them they turn into blood and flesh. Nowhere does he utter those words. It was mortal corruptible men that came along and perverted the words of Jesus to mean something entirely different.
Anyone that has the ability to read the Bible clearly understands that Jesus was using the bread and wine as symbols. He never stated that once you eat or drink them they turn into blood and flesh. Nowhere does he utter those words. It was mortal corruptible men that came along and perverted the words of Jesus to mean something entirely different.
Which theologians/churchmen prior to the Reformation have you read that teach this symbolic view interpretation?
Anyone that has the ability to read the Bible clearly understands that Jesus was using the bread and wine as symbols. He never stated that once you eat or drink them they turn into blood and flesh. Nowhere does he utter those words. It was mortal corruptible men that came along and perverted the words of Jesus to mean something entirely different.
you need to go see an optometrist!
John 6: "I am the bread of life..." v.35 & v.48 & v.51 - REPEATED in triplicate so no-one can miss!
and "...this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it..." v.50
and "...this bread that I will give is my flesh... v.51"
and "...unless you eatthe flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life ..." v.53
and "Whoever eats/[trōgōn; ie to gnaw/crunch/munch] my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life" v.56
and "...my flesh is real food, my bloodreal drink..." v.55 - notice he says real, and not 'symbolic' - duh !
and "...whoever eats this bread will live forever.” v.58
Mat 26: Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” v.26 he took a cup...and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood v.27/28
Mk 14: "... he took bread...and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is my body.” v.22 "...he took a cup,..., and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. He said to them, “This is my blood... v.23/23
Lk 22:
"...he took the bread, .... and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body..." v.19
"...And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood...v.20
The Episcopalian POV: Maybe. If you wanna believe that, you can. If you want to think the Eucharist is just a "remembrance", you can believe that, too. Or anything in between, which is where most of us fall, I think.
I always thought that Episcopalians believed in "consubstantiation" and only RCs believed in "transubstantiation".
John 6: "I am the bread of life..." v.35 & v.48 & v.51 - REPEATED in triplicate so no-one can miss!
and "...this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it..." v.50
and "...this bread that I will give is my flesh... v.51"
and "...unless you eatthe flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life ..." v.53
and "Whoever eats/[trōgōn; ie to gnaw/crunch/munch] my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life" v.56
and "...my flesh is real food, my bloodreal drink..." v.55 - notice he says real, and not 'symbolic' - duh !
and "...whoever eats this bread will live forever.” v.58
Mat 26: Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” v.26 he took a cup...and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood v.27/28
Mk 14: "... he took bread...and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is my body.” v.22 "...he took a cup,..., and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. He said to them, “This is my blood... v.23/23
Lk 22:
"...he took the bread, .... and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body..." v.19
"...And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood...v.20
Or is your bible missing the four gospels?
In every verse you quoted the reference to blood or body is symbolic not literal.
Oh boy....another discussion based on interpretation.
"This is my body" Is this a statement that should be taken literally or symbolically?
As for the founding of the Church, I haven't seen any scripture where Jesus identifies the church as "Catholic".
From an article I read:
Quote:
The earliest document we have in which “Catholic” is used to label the Church is a letter from Ignatius of Antioch, who wrote around A.D. 107, while being taken to Rome for execution. For all we know, the term was used well before that time—which is to say, in the time of the apostles.
Somebody used that term for the church and it's been used ever since but I haven't read any scripture where Jesus calls His Church a "Catholic Church".
As for the founding of the Church, I haven't seen any scripture where Jesus identifies the church as "Catholic".
From an article I read:
Somebody used that term for the church and it's been used ever since but I haven't read any scripture where Jesus calls His Church a "Catholic Church".
The word "catholic" comes from the Greek word καθολικός (katholikos), which means "universal", or "worldwide".
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.
