H
holdencaulfield
Guest
I also tried to use more recent miracles to convince him of this like the Eucharistic Miracle at Lanciano, however it did not work. Should I try again?
How to argue the Holy Eucharist to a Sola Scriptura Protestant
- Status
N
Newbie2
Guest
For protestants, such recent miracles are useless and not reliable. They need Scriptural support, or it just ain’t true.
H
holdencaulfield
Guest
Yea that’s true.For protestants, such recent miracles are useless and not reliable. They need Scriptural support, or it just ain’t true.
I
inthecloud
Guest
Once they say something like that is a waste of time to discuss with them.
I do not know if the realize that if the underlined thought is true, the whole BAYBLE is not true. After that the NT are interpretations and recolections of what the Apostles thought Jesus taught.
But you cannot expect logic from a conservative protestant.
H
holdencaulfield
Guest
Usually you can. They usually are willing to quote the Bible on demand. “see look here it’s in the Bible.” Not this time.
J
Joero
Guest
The scripture says that a person who covers up his foolishness is better than one who keeps his wisdom to himself (Sirach 20:30).
H
holdencaulfield
Guest
Yes I agree.The scripture says that a person who covers up his foolishness is better than one who keeps his wisdom to himself (Sirach 20:30).
I
inthecloud
Guest
But conservative protestants do not read Ben Sirach.
Is one of those nasty books added at Trent.
Is one of those nasty books added at Trent.
H
holdencaulfield
Guest
Are we using “conservative” in the meaning for politics or for religion. Because conservative in politics, doesn’t indicate a particular Christian faith. In religion the “conservatives” would be the Catholics because they haven’t changed the Church very much since the beginning.But conservative protestants do not read Ben Sirach.
Is one of those nasty books added at Trent.
J
Joero
Guest
I think it was already there in the Septuagint version made by Greek- speaking Jews before Christ was incarnated. It was only abolished sometime in the year 90 A.D. by non-christian Jews which they called the 2nd canon of the scriptures. The council of Trent merely recognized what had been recognized in the council of Carthage sometime in 397 A.D. after the great persecution by the pagan Roman empire.But conservative protestants do not read Ben Sirach.
Is one of those nasty books added at Trent.
Speaking of changes about the catholic church, yes I would agree with you but not to the dogmas and doctrines of the catholic church.
H
holdencaulfield
Guest
This is quite true.
I think you need to read your Catechism again, because I don’t care about what political affiliation many Catholics are; however the Catholic Church has the most Conservative doctrine and dogma of any Christian Church by far. By the way, almost every Catholic I know is very conservative.
J
Joero
Guest
I agree with you, holdencaulfield, pertaining to the conservativeness of the catholic church, but may be that’s due because dogmas are forever, isn’t it ?
I
inthecloud
Guest
I think that the EOC and the OOC are very conservative too.
Ben Sirach was popular among the Jews of Damascus, fragments in hebrew were found in a Synagoge there.
The Septugaint of course has it and it was commented by Rabbis in Jesus’s times. And the ECFs.
I was mocking the critics of the Catholic Canon.
Ben Sirach was popular among the Jews of Damascus, fragments in hebrew were found in a Synagoge there.
The Septugaint of course has it and it was commented by Rabbis in Jesus’s times. And the ECFs.
I was mocking the critics of the Catholic Canon.
J
Joero
Guest
Yes, that’s true. As for me, I sometimes use their method, in some other cases, to expound the literal sense of a certain topic, but not all the time. 
E
epostle
Guest
The Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist was not formally challenged until the 11th century. It was impossible to be a Christian and reject something so fundamental. If Protestants are right, then every Christian in the first 1000+ years was stupid.
Furthermore, if Protestants are right, then St. Ignatius of Antioch, who was trained by St. John the Apostle, and ordained by St. Peter, didn’t know what he was talking about, but they know more than he did.
Furthermore, if Protestants are right, then St. Ignatius of Antioch, who was trained by St. John the Apostle, and ordained by St. Peter, didn’t know what he was talking about, but they know more than he did.
J
Joero
Guest
That’s true, I appreciate that. Maybe the other reason also that the protestants don’t want to believe the real presence is that they knew that their father of protestantism (Martin Luther), was not a bishop as well as the other sects of protestantism. For the power of consecrating the priesthood office belongs to the bishops. So, none of the descendants of their father becomes a priest, logically speaking. I just pray for their enlightenment. 
Y
Yerusalyim
Guest
What amazes me about Christians who deny the real presence is that they have no problem accepting that God made the universe, but find it impossible or even improbable that God can make bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.
J
Joero
Guest
Yes, that’s true. Maybe because they think that the offering to God the Father done in the old covenant by the high priest (Aaronic line of priestly office) stops. Of course, the priesthood and the kinds of offering in the old covenant stops because there is another kind of priestly office and another kind of offering much greater than the old covenant. And this is the priestly office of the High Priest in the new covenant, Jesus Christ, and His offering, His body and blood, is the offering which is very pleasing to God the Father. And that is the holy sacrifice of the mass. And what church who has this kind of faith? None other but the Catholic church.
The incarnation of the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity way back more than two thousand years ago makes Him great forever and ever, ontologically speaking, because He is great even not incarnated for He is God, together with the Father. If He was not incarnated our salvation is doomed.
The incarnation of the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity way back more than two thousand years ago makes Him great forever and ever, ontologically speaking, because He is great even not incarnated for He is God, together with the Father. If He was not incarnated our salvation is doomed.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
But what do you understand by this ? And what does the other person understand by it ? Are you certain that the two of you do not mean different things ? Or, could the other person be rejecting something that you too would reject, if you knew his mind ?
BTW, one cannot argue people into faith. Faith is something God alone can give. People cannot be given faith by us - any more than we can make a skeleton a living man. At most, we can do something to ease the way a little, by (for example) clearing away difficulties. But if people have not eyes to see, we cannot open them. Reason is in any case rather superficial - it can be used to argue anything, however unreasonable. It’s not useless,but it is very limited.
“Physically” is ambiguous - it can mean:
- 1. the physis, the nature, of a thing - or
- 2. as in “relating to physics” - or
- 3. physical in the sense “material”
The change in the Eucharist is nothing to do with sense 2 or sense 3. Because it has nothing to do with 3, it cannot be detected by means appropriate to 2. So there is no evidence of any change in what the the Host is made of - there is a change, but it can be known only through faith.
- real - i.e. not purely intellectual, like a thought
- true - the Sacrament is not purely a token of His Presence; it is that - & it is far more as well
- substantial - Christ Himself is Present, in the manner of a sacrament.
Where does He say it changes ? AFAIK, He says things which we understand as requiring it to have changed - but that is not quite the same 
I think “Them” wins on points
I think it’s a great pity to be angry over something such as the Eucharist: it should be a cause of union & joy & love - not of war. Especially between Christians
Why not find something you can both be at one on ?
J
Joero
Guest
The essence of the decree on ecumenism by Vatican ll suggests that as christians we should abide by the teaching of our Lord to love our fellow men. But it does not mean we just take for granted the truth the true church teaches for we are to adhere to what Christ wants us to do as found in Mat. 28: 19 - 20.
- Status