No, only studying with my grandmother. I dont believe what they teach anymore, I used to believe are Catholics were going to be brutally murdered when Armageddon comes. After some research I discovered this religion has made many false prophecies and corrupts the word of God. Luckily my parents arent JWs but there not religious at all so when I get my drivers licence hopefully I can start attending a Catholic Church God willing!Im 17 btwwatched it … was good. Are you currently Jehovah Witness ?
Did you show them the video ? Do they know you will soon convert to CC ?No, only studying with my grandmother. I dont believe what they teach anymore, I used to believe are Catholics were going to be brutally murdered when Armageddon comes. After some research I discovered this religion has made many false prophecies and corrupts the word of God. Luckily my parents arent JWs but there not religious at all so when I get my drivers licence hopefully I can start attending a Catholic Church God willing!Im 17 btw
You described the Catholic teaching as “a quirky relic of the popular interpretation”. Most who disagree with Catholic doctrine claim that early Christians people had the pure doctrine, but the institutional Church later added false doctrine, and weeded out the “relics”, the true doctrine of the believers. You seem to say the Catholic Church doctrine was the popular doctrine, and it was early.The scripture used to justify the theory of transubstantiation is based on a very strained interpretation of scripture that was codified in the early days of the Church and, of course, the Catholic Church and other Churches have been loathe to change their teaching on this sort of thing. This is really a quirky relic of the popular interpretation at a formative time in Christian Theology…?
No they wouldnt watch that video, they would just look at me weird. No I haven’t told anybody I’m planning on converting to Catholicism.Did you show them the video ? Do they know you will soon convert to CC ?
Once you convert, are Baptized/Confirmed in HS and receive the Eucharist … then they might come to Mass with you. Hopefully too, to see your entry into the Church via the Sacred Sacraments ! Many children have had major impact on parents, leading them into the Church. Parents trust their child’s testamony of conversion more than that of another.No they wouldnt watch that video, they would just look at me weird. No I haven’t told anybody I’m planning on converting to Catholicism.
Idk they have a negative attitude towards the RCC.Once you convert, are Baptized/Confirmed in HS and receive the Eucharist … then they might come to Mass with you. Hopefully too, to see your entry into the Church via the Sacred Sacraments ! Many children have had major impact on parents, leading them into the Church. Parents trust their child’s testamony of conversion more than that of another.
Not true. It could have remained water, none of us were there, however in the minds of those that drank, they saw wine, tasted wine and believed it was wine and it would still have been a miracle.The difference between those miracles and transubstantiation is that those miracles resulted in verifiable manifestation. When Jesus turned water into wine, he didn’t just say that the water was wine but retained all the discernible properties of water - the water actually turned into wine, with all the properties of wine. Jesus spoke often in allegory, parable, and in non-literal terms. The main reason I see why the RCC maintains this dogma is that it cannot admit error and therefore persists in the mental gymnastics necessary to believe that bread and wine are not what they are.
Your understanding should take into account the the Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox and Catholic East and West base their theology on the central reality of the Eucharist.The scripture used to justify the theory of transubstantiation is based on a very strained interpretation of scripture that was codified in the early days of the Church and, of course, the Catholic Church and other Churches have been loathe to change their teaching on this sort of thing. This is really a quirky relic of the popular interpretation at a formative time in Christian Theology, and I think that it is entirely irrelevant to salvation or more important theological concerns, so I’m not going to press anyone on it or anything. But do you really think it more reasonable that God would make our worship of him dependent on our pretending that bread is not bread and that wine is not wine, than that He meant us to perform this tradition in spiritual remembrance and renewal of His sacrifice? What possible purpose would this magical and mystical act of invisible transformation serve that God could not perform through less irrational means?
When Christ said “You are the salt of the earth” did he miraculously transform people into salt?
You are not familiar with the Journal of Oral Tradition that explains the importance of Tradition in Judaism and Christianity.I should just note that all you seem to be arguing is an Argument from Tradition, which is not exactly compelling. I think you need something more than that if you want people to believe that something indistinguishable from bread is not bread.
We could try an experiment to put this all to rest. Take 10 untransubstantiated wafers and 10 transubstantiated wafers and see if anyone in the Catholic Church can pick the correct ones from a lineup. That would certainly put everyone in their place.