Debating a Jew : The Doctrine of Transubstantiation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wandile
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Wandile

Guest
Hi I’m Catholic and I’m having a debate with a jew on whether Jesus is Messiah : debate.org/debates/Jesus-is-not-the-Messiah/5/

I’m beating him so far but he claims that Jesus’ teaching of us needing to drink his blood and eat His flesh is a false teaching. I believe in Transubstantiation but I’m having a hard time refuting this argument.

So here is my question :

Well I just needed to ask for an explanation of how the doctrine of Transubstantiation conforms with these two passages in scripture :

"Any Israelite or any alien living among them who eats any blood-I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people. For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life. Therefore I say to the Israelites, “none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien among you eat blood.” "
(Leviticus 17:10-12)

“But be sure you do not eat blood, because the blood is the life, and you must not eat the life with the meat.”
(Deuteronomy 12:23)

I appreciate all your help and i need the answers like right now. 🙂
 
Hi I’m Catholic and I’m having a debate with a jew on whether Jesus is Messiah : debate.org/debates/Jesus-is-not-the-Messiah/5/

I’m beating him so far but he claims that Jesus’ teaching of us needing to drink his blood and eat His flesh is a false teaching. I believe in Transubstantiation but I’m having a hard time refuting this argument.

So here is my question :

Well I just needed to ask for an explanation of how the doctrine of Transubstantiation conforms with these two passages in scripture :

"Any Israelite or any alien living among them who eats any blood-I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people. For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life. Therefore I say to the Israelites, “none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien among you eat blood.” "
(Leviticus 17:10-12)

“But be sure you do not eat blood, because the blood is the life, and you must not eat the life with the meat.”
(Deuteronomy 12:23)

I appreciate all your help and i need the answers like right now. 🙂
Deuterotomy is second law, a law of compromise…with curses…recall that every first born son and father was a priest before the Golden Calf and the Levites were priests after that.

Ezra is the father of Judaism…recall that Judaism of today has no priests, no Ark, and that Judaism dates to Ezra…

Paul points out that the Old Covenant is dead in Romans 7…so if the Old Covenant is dead then these laws are not binding…
1Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man
.

Now the Jew will not accept Paul…but ask the Jew how he/she is keeping the law…since there is no Levitical priesthood, no temple, no Ark and no animal sacrifices as prescribed by Deuterotonmy…so if the Jew is saying that this is a violation of the law…modern day Jews are lawbreakers not keeping the Law…remind the Jew that Moses and Joshua said that the Israelites would break the law and so far you see no modern day Jew doing any better (song of Moses and end of Joshua) How can a Jew hold you accountable to laws that they do not keep…

Point to Exodus 19 and the words of Moses…
5Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:** 6And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.** These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
Ask where is this Israel Holy Nation?..we see it as the Church…the People of God…
 
If I’m not mistaken, when Catholics speak of Christ’s Blood and Body it refers to a literal metaphysical change, of course, but not a change to literal blood-flesh.

I believe the Noahide commandment prohibits eating or drinking literal animal blood from the veins, but not from the muscle tissue. You’ll have to check this information though.
 
Deuterotomy is second law, a law of compromise…with curses…recall that every first born son and father was a priest before the Golden Calf and the Levites were priests after that.

Ezra is the father of Judaism…recall that Judaism of today has no priests, no Ark, and that Judaism dates to Ezra…

Paul points out that the Old Covenant is dead in Romans 7…so if the Old Covenant is dead then these laws are not binding…

Now the Jew will not accept Paul…but ask the Jew how he/she is keeping the law…since there is no Levitical priesthood, no temple, no Ark and no animal sacrifices as prescribed by Deuterotonmy…so if the Jew is saying that this is a violation of the law…modern day Jews are lawbreakers not keeping the Law…remind the Jew that Moses and Joshua said that the Israelites would break the law and so far you see no modern day Jew doing any better (song of Moses and end of Joshua) How can a Jew hold you accountable to laws that they do not keep…

Point to Exodus 19 and the words of Moses…

Ask where is this Israel Holy Nation?..we see it as the Church…the People of God…
These are some very tenuous, and some very mistaken arguments and assumptions. I would not turn your argument into a “Real Judaism was X,” and not just for courtesy.
 
Whatever you do, do not let your argument be one of your ego over his. That is not God’s will.
 
in my opinion the argument isn’t worth while because you both have completely different outlooks on who Jesus is. Discuss by all means but - beat? I think it more valuable you learn their doctrine that will be different from ‘ours’ and be mature about it and learn to respect the differences and see where the differences lead you to the similarities. 😃
 
Fr. Mitch talked about this on an EWTN episode. I thought blood for Jews was unholy but that’s actually not true. Fr. Mitch said that blood was holy. And, those two Scripture quotes point toward that.
"Any Israelite or any alien living among them who eats any blood-I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people. **For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life. **
**For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life. **
If I remember correctly Moses threw blood on the Israelites to purify them before God.

Anyway, it’s very interesting. That blood is “given…to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar;…atonement for one’s life.”

And, this is what Catholics practice. We receive absolution from our sins by Jesus’ priest in order to receive Jesus’ Body and Blood.

As the above poster spoke of, “beating him” isn’t the best way to approach apologetics. Teaching what we believe, yes.
 
Well, there’s a fundamental restructuring of religious practice that proceeds from the new covenant. this might mean that the two of you cannot reach an agreement on this issue. have you, by chance, agreed to attempt to “prove” Christianity using only the context of the Old Testament? if so, you’re on a difficult project…

if, however, he’s willing to accept your assertion that Christianity proves itself through the combination of OT & NT (in other words, he’s not looking for you to convince him of something he doesn’t believe, but only to demonstrate that there’s internal consistency in your arguments), then you should be OK. Peter’s vision tells him that all food is clean; the instruction given to Gentiles is simply to avoid food that had been sacrificed to idols. in this context, blood is ok – but if he wants you to prove this using only the OT, you might not be able to do it satisfactorily…
 
John 6 records that many followers left because they would not accept this difficult teaching. The fact Jesus did not yield attests to its veracity.

“unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you have no life within you”

By taking Him into ourselves, His life comes into us. This is not a contradiction of the prohibition against eating the blood of animals since Jesus’ blood isn’t the blood of an animal. It is God’s blood.

God wants to give us His life. To do so, we must avoid mimicry.
 
Whatever you do, do not let your argument be one of your ego over his. That is not God’s will.
I agree.
Hi I’m Catholic and I’m having a debate with a jew on whether Jesus is Messiah : debate.org/debates/Jesus-is-not-the-Messiah/5/

I’m beating him so far
Apologetics is not something we “win”. Other people are not opponents to be defeated.

If that’s our goal then it is nothing more than pride.

Please don’t let this happen. As Al stated, it’s not what God wants. Our Holy Mother Mary does not like it when her Children fight.

-Tim-
 
I’m sorry for saying “I’m beating him”. This came off wrong and didn’t really reflect what I meant. What I mean was that I have presented more convincing arguments to prove Jesus’ case. My aim is to make him accept Jesus. He challenged me to the debate so and on this site there are “winners” and “losers” so that is why I said I am beating him. But don’t get me wrong… I do this out of the love of the Gospel of Our Lord. I’m not doing this out of pride.

Thanks for the answers so far and please continue posting more.

May the love of God be with you all.
 
My aim is to make him accept Jesus
Don’t make it about you. You’re not able to make anyone believe in Jesus. That takes the work of the Holy Spirit.
 
Encourage your Jewish friend to visit the website on Eucharist miracles.Also,when Christ first said Do this in memory of me,as many of His followers were repulsed by His command,leaving only the twelve apostles to remain with Him.Christ didn’t say to those leaving,“wait,I only meant this as a representation of my body and blood,not literally”.He let them go,and then the others why the remained.There reply was because they believed He was the Son ofGod.
 
I read the debate. I wish people could debate without commenting on their opponent. It makes it sound like professional wrestling.🤷
 
I’m sorry for saying “I’m beating him”. This came off wrong and didn’t really reflect what I meant. What I mean was that I have presented more convincing arguments to prove Jesus’ case. My aim is to make him accept Jesus. He challenged me to the debate so and on this site there are “winners” and “losers” so that is why I said I am beating him. But don’t get me wrong… I do this out of the love of the Gospel of Our Lord. I’m not doing this out of pride.
Thanks for the answers so far and please continue posting more.
May the love of God be with you all.
Wandile,

You cannot “make” someone accept Jesus. Besides the fact that it’s impractical, it can also be quite rude, even if you’ve a heart of gold.
 
The law prohibits the eating of flesh and blood from what is dead.

Jesus Christ is not dead, Jesus is alive so this removes the false notion of canabilsm.

The old covenant deals with flesh, the new and everlasting covenant fulfills the old covenant raising it to an eternal covenant of God made real in the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

In the old covenant they are required to sacrifice a lamb, spread its blood upon their dwelling, then consume the lamb. God made this law perpetual never ending.

In the new covenant when it is “the spirit that gives life while the flesh is of no avail” John 6:63. Jesus is the sacrificial Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world, becomes the sacrificial lamb eternally done “once and for all”. But in order to keep the perpetual law which God commanded from the Old Covenant to be kept. Jesus says “you must eat my flesh and drink my blood” in order to have eternal life.

What is eternal cannot be repeated, thus the Eucharist remains perpetual in the “do this in memory of me”, which fulfills the perpetual law of the old covenant in consuming the Lamb of God.

What this body and blood of the lamb does, is what the first sacrificial lamb did; It delivered all the first born from certain death. How? they had to consume it.

When we consume the lamb’s flesh and the lamb’s blood in the Eucharist, we enter into the mysteries of God, (we consume the lamb, who covers our dwelling (souls) with His blood, that gives us eternal life from eternal death ) when in eternal reality it is Jesus who consumes us to himself in order to give us eternal life. For example; We know no one can go before the Father except through Jesus. When we consume the Eucharist which is the body, blood, soul an divinity of Jesus Christ, our flesh cannot go before God lest we will surely die. Jesus consumes our souls with His own body and blood, by us consuming His Eucharist from our flesh, so that we are made son’s of God “in Him, with Him and through Him”, when we become “partakers of His divine nature” to go before God and offer our “Thanksgiving = Eucharist” and worship to the Father.

Jesus is the Old covenant show bread fulfilled, when God’s presence is made known to His people. Jesus fulfills the Kingly priesthood according the order of Melchisedeck, by offering His sacrificial body and blood from the form of bread and wine. And when ever there is a new high Priestly King, there is a change of law. When Jesus fulfills the Old Covenant law of the flesh conforming it to His body and blood which is the New eternal everlasting covenant in the Spirit, when it is the Spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail.

Transubstantiation? reveals that a change of the substance of bread and wine have transubstantiated into the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. What this change confirms from trans. is that to our flesh, we see, taste, smell bread and wine, but eternally to our soul they are truly and substantially the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. Thus again Jesus Words are revealed in Truth when it is the Spirit that gives life, while to our flesh is of no avail.

The Lamb supper is the fulfillment of when the elders of Israel went up to the mountain “consuming bread and wine in the presence of God”. So now we do so consuming the true bread from heaven in the presence of God.

Remember it is revealed from scripture that man does not live on bread alone, but on every Word spoken from the mouth of God. “And the Word became flesh” So Jesus promises His followers that if we “eat his flesh, and drink His blood (every Word of God) I will give you eternal life”. Those who do not eat my flesh and drink my blood do not have life, but remain in the flesh which is destined to die the death.

One thing to remember is that the mystery of the Eucharist can never be exhausted from carnal knowledge and understanding. The Eucharist is not for unbelievers, baptism is required here, once in the Spirit these can consume the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ.

Thus Paul writes this;
1Corinthians 2: 1 When I came to you, brothers, proclaiming the mystery of God,…
2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
5 so that your faith might rest not on human wisdom but on the power of God.
7 Rather, we speak God’s wisdom, mysterious, hidden, which God predetermined before the ages for our glory,
9 But as it is written: “What eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and what has not entered the human heart, what God has prepared for those who love him,”
10** this God has revealed to us through the Spirit.For the Spirit scrutinizes everything, even the depths of God. **
11 Among human beings, who knows what pertains to a person except the spirit of the person that is within? Similarly, no one knows what pertains to God except the Spirit of God.
12 **We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the things freely given us by God. 13 And we speak about them not with words taught by human wisdom, but with words taught by the Spirit, describing spiritual realities in spiritual terms. 14 Now the natural person does not accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him it is foolishness, and he cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually. 15 The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgment by anyone. 16 For “who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to counsel him?” But we have the mind of Christ. **
 
You must not, however, eat flesh with its life-blood in it. Gen 9:4
That was not the law referenced from the discussion. But still holds true here. God commands Noah now to eat flesh with its life blood in it you shall not eat. Noah is not going to eat a lamb while it is still walking and dancing. Noah will have to kill the beast first, but not consume its flesh while the life blood remained in it. Thus Noah had to kosher the flesh make it clean before consuming it, by draining the blood from the beast flesh.

Our sins in effect did the same to Jesus. But we did not kill Jesus, Jesus layed down His own life for our sins. Then raised His body up. Jesus began His passion, death and resurrection at the last supper, when Jesus began His sacrifice by separating His blood from His body for His disciples to consume while Jesus lived among them.

Then later after the resurrection Jesus alive among His disciples shares this same breaking of bread on the road to Emmaus, when they recognized Jesus in the breaking of bread and then vanished from their sight as they consumed His Eucharist after the resurrection. See Luke 22, 24. In both instances Jesus is not a dead flesh that is consumed, but Living.

How do you interpret Gen 9;4? Did God instruct Noah to not eat flesh while it was still walking around and living? Or did God instruct Noah not eat flesh “dead” while it still had its’ lifeblood contained in the flesh?

This makes a fascinating topic.
 
That was not the law referenced from the discussion. But still holds true here. God commands Noah now to eat flesh with its life blood in it you shall not eat. Noah is not going to eat a lamb while it is still walking and dancing. Noah will have to kill the beast first, but not consume its flesh while the life blood remained in it. Thus Noah had to kosher the flesh make it clean before consuming it, by draining the blood from the beast flesh.
Actually, it is saying ‘don’t eat things while they’re alive’, the ‘koshering’ comes from Leviticus.
Our sins in effect did the same to Jesus. But we did not kill Jesus, Jesus layed down His own life for our sins. Then raised His body up. Jesus began His passion, death and resurrection at the last supper, when Jesus began to separate His blood from His body for His disciples to consume while Jesus lived among them. Then later after the resurrection Jesus alive among His disciples shares this same breaking of bread on the road to Emmaus, when they recognized Jesus in the breaking of bread and then vanished from their sight as they consumed His Eucharist after the resurrection. See Luke 22, 24
This makes a fascinating topic.
Somebody else’s scriptures as far as I’m concerned. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top