Are those who do not receive Jesus in Holy Eucharist really Christians? Is it insanity for them to continue claiming to be Christians?

  • Thread starter Thread starter StMarina303ad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mickey said:
I am not familiar with a quote of Eusebius denying the Real Presence. Do you have it?
Click to expand...
Here is one example. There are others I don’t have at hand right now.
He plainly teaches that in place of the ancient sacrifices and whole burnt-offerings the incarnate presence of Christ that was prepared was offered. And this very thing He proclaims to his Church as a great mystery expressed with prophetic voice in the volume of the book. As we have received a memorial of this offering which we celebrate on a table by means of symbols of His Body and saving Blood according to the laws of the new covenant,
Click to expand...
tertullian.org/fathers/eusebius_de_03_book1.htm
 
StMarina303ad said:
Everyone has a choice to accept Jesus and His Teachings or to reject Jesus and His Teachings. Everyone who accepts Jesus and His Teachings, which includes Holy Eucharist, are Christians. Those who reject Jesus…Well, you had a choice.
Click to expand...
Thanks … I was being sarcastic as to some of the free will/predestination threads going on … sorry if I mislead anyone by my sarcasm.
 
sandusky said:
How do you know?
Click to expand...
Jesus promised the gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church, I am in His Church so it can’t be wrong.

The Church is Christ’s bride so the two are one … if I am in the Church I am united with Christ.
 
SyCarl said:
Here is one example. There are others I don’t have at hand right now.
Click to expand...
LOL! This shows nothing. Is that all you got–and obscure passage from Eusebius? I do not think that you want to start a game of dueling Church Father quotes. :rotfl:
 
StMarina303ad said:
B]The only problem with this reasoning is this:
The only “Follower of Christ”, who remained a Follower of Christ after Jesus’ preaching as recorded in John 6, while not believing Jesus words about eating His Flesh and Drinking His Blood in Holy Eucharist is Judas
And according to Jesus, in the last verse in John 6, Judas remained a “follower of Jesus” in order to attempt to destroy Christianity from within. *Judas is the ultimate traitor of Christianity. *

One who claims to be a Christian, even if validly baptized, who at the same time continues to reject Jesus in the Holy Eucharist is exactly like Judas…“it would have been better for him if he had not been born”.

Protestants have to think and pray long and hard…Do you really want to be another Judas?

Someones stance on the Eucharist has huge consequences for that person eternally - Christ’s very words, “you have NO Life in you” - “unless you Eat My Flesh and Drink My Blood”.

Belief in Greek, the language the Bible was written in “Believe” has a meaning of thought and action combined. Not only must we “believe” in our hearts, but we MUST take action to prove that belief - read the New Testament book of James, “Faith without works is DEAD”. The New Testament is filled with things such as: Even Satan knows Jesus is Lord and he trembles.
Click to expand...
The best thing to do is ask father on sunday. I think you may be surprised.
 
StMarina303ad said:
The only problem with this reasoning is this:
The only “Follower of Christ”, who remained a Follower of Christ after Jesus’ preaching as recorded in John 6, while not believing Jesus words about eating His Flesh and Drinking His Blood in Holy Eucharist is Judas and according to Jesus, in the last verse in John 6, Judas remained a “follower of Jesus” in order to attempt to destroy Christianity from within. Judas is the ultimate traitor of Christianity.

One who claims to be a Christian, even if validly baptized, who at the same time continues to reject Jesus in the Holy Eucharist is exactly like Judas…“it would have been better for him if he had not been born”.

Protestants have to think and pray long and hard…do you really want to be another Judas?

As you can clearly see, no one can accuse me of being opinionated :rotfl: - 😉 But I hope I am able to convey how serious a matter this is as someone stance on the Eucharist has huge consequences for that person eternally - Christ’s very words, “you have NO Life in you” - “unless you Eat My Flesh and Drink My Blood”.
Click to expand...
See, I think that my problem is that this is not the Official teaching of the Catholic CHurch. I think that you are Orthodox, and it may be the teaching in yours.
 
sandusky said:
No, it’s the same; perhaps it’s your eye that’s at fault. :hmmm:
Click to expand...
That is possible. It is equally possible that your eye is at fault.

I am confused.

If only there was someone who was taught by the Apostles themselves about this issue. They would know…
 
40.png
StMarina303ad:
They are rejecting Christ’s very words. By doing so they are rejecting Christ Jesus Himself in Holy Eucharist! It is not a simple misunderstanding.
Click to expand...
Who’s rejecting Christ’s words? Those in John 6, or all non-Catholics?
40.png
StMarina303ad:
It is a conscience effort to chose to reject the overwhelming evidence by not to believing Jesus on this matter.
Click to expand...
I believe Jesus, and I believe that He spoke figuratively.
40.png
StMarina303ad:
We have not only Christ’s clear words in the Gospel on this issue, we also have St. Paul’s clear words in the New Testament on the issue…
Click to expand...
Paul never expounds on the eucharist; he merely restates Christ’s words.

StMarina303ad said:
…we also have 2000 years of consistant witness on the issue and we even have had many Eucharistic Miracles through out the 20 Centuries.
Click to expand...

That’s the main reason—2,000 years of witness—older is better, older is truth. 🤷
40.png
StMarina303ad:
There is such overwhelming evidence that Jesus meant what He said that to reject Jesus on this issue is not a simple misunderstanding, but a conscience effort to not believe Him.
Click to expand...
Again, I believe the Lord’s words, and I believe that He spoke figuratively.
40.png
StMarina303ad:
If someone doesn’t even believe in Christ; how on earth can anyone consider him a Christian - regardless of whether or not he was baptized.
Click to expand...
I agree; how can those who don’t believe in Christ consider themselves Christians?
 
ralphinal said:
That is possible. It is equally possible that your eye is at fault.

I am confused.

If only there was someone who was taught by the Apostles themselves about this issue. They would know…
Click to expand...
I’m taught by the apostles on this issue through the testimony they recorded. :hmmm:
 
sandusky said:
I’m taught by the apostles on this issue through the testimony they recorded. :hmmm:
Click to expand...
I am not so sure about that.

You are looking at the words that were written and getting something out of it that I am not. And the inverse is also true.

How can this be?
 
ncgolf said:
Jesus promised the gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church, I am in His Church so it can’t be wrong.

The Church is Christ’s bride so the two are one … if I am in the Church I am united with Christ.
Click to expand...
So you know that the bread you adore and worship is God because you’re in His Church.

How do you know that the church you’re in is His Church?
 
"Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that fears him, and works righteousness, is accepted with him." Acts 10:35
 
ralphinal said:
I am not so sure about that.

You are looking at the words that were written and getting something out of it that I am not. And the inverse is also true.

How can this be?
Click to expand...
Because you’re understanding is required by your 2,000-year-old (older is better, older is truth), infallible teaching magisterium, to be in line with what it calls, “the deposit of faith,” no matter what the testimony itself says. 🤷
 
sandusky said:
Because you’re understanding is required by your 2,000-year-old (older is better, older is truth), infallible teaching magisterium, to be in line with what it calls, “the deposit of faith,” no matter what the testimony itself says. 🤷
Click to expand...
Since God established a living Church, it grows deeper in understanding of Him over time. So while the doctrines have never changed to mean reverse of what they once meant, they do however grow deeper as time goes on.

I do not understand how, if you are not catholic, you can be sure your interpretation of Scripture is the true one? Maybe you just haven’t thought about it.
 
sandusky said:
Because you’re understanding is required by your 2,000-year-old (older is better, older is truth), infallible teaching magisterium, to be in line with what it calls, “the deposit of faith,” no matter what the testimony itself says. 🤷
Click to expand...
See, this gets to my problem.

WHy is it that my interpretation, which is based on the Catholic understanding of Scriptures, automatically incorrect and yours is not?

Why are we correct on the Trinity and not on this?

Which is more clear in scripture?

Which pulls more from Tradition?

Further, why is it that different people see different doctrines in Scripture? IF you say that not all are lead by the Spirit, I would ask how you know that you are the correct one?
 
ncgolf said:
You’ve never prayed the Rosary so I see why you wouldn’t know. 🙂

Somehow these things just seem to work out.
Click to expand...
🤷 I have prayed the rosary, many times, and I was an altar boy for years.

How do you know it was His mom?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top