I just must ask

[rev_kevin]

Really Kevin? Where specifically does Jesus say that in John 6?

If that were true, then why does St. Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, plainly tell us that we become guilty of the body and blood of Our Lord if we receive the Eucharist unworthily. That wouldn’t be possible if communion was just symbolic because one can’t be guilty of a body and blood if it wasn’t actually present.

John 6:35 “I am the bread of life.”
John 6:32-33 "I assure you, Moses didn’t give them bread from heaven. My Father did. And now he offers you the true bread from heaven. The true bread for God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.

Paul gives specific instructions on how the Lord’s Supper should be observed.

1. We should take the Lord’s Supper thoughtfully because we are proclaining that Christ died for our sins.
2. We should take it worthily with due reverence and respect.
3. We should examine ourselves for any unconfessed sin or resentful attitude and be properly prepared.
4. We should be consideerate of others, waiting until everyone is there and then eating in an orderly and unified manner.

When Paul said that no one should take the Lord’s Supper unworthily, he was speaking to the church members who were participating in it without thinking of its meaning. Those who did so were guilty of sinning against the body and the blood of the Lord. Instead of honoring his sacrifice they were sharing in the guilt of those who crucified Christ. In reality, no one is worthy to take the Lord’s Supper. We are all sinners saved by grace. This is why we should prepare ourselves for Communion through healthy introspection, confession of sin, and resolution of differences with others. These action remove the barriers that affect our relationship with Christ and with other believers.Awareness of our sins should not keep us away fron Communion but drive us to participate in it.
To not honor the body of Christ means not understanding what the Lord’s Supper means and not distinguishing if from a normal meal

 

[BILL_PICK53]

Don’t Catholics take the Bible literally?
What part of the Bible is figurative to Catholics?

rev, Can you tell me what verses in the bible tell us it is symbol and what is figrative,

 

[Richard_Kastner]

God would have never told Moses to violate the second commandment but God did tell Moses to make an image of a snake and put it on a pole and all who looked upon it were healed. God also gave us what you would call the Lord’s Supper. You believe it is a “symbol” and it is made by human hands and you do it as a ritual. Are you violating the second commandment?

Ya, see Third there’s a couple of differences here. First with the image on the pole. It was God who expressly told Moses to make this image. Second, the people were not instructed to bow down to it, and third the image was completely symbolic, in that it was representative of Christ on the cross. Our sin bearer. God did give us the Lord’s supper, but unlike you we believe that the elements are symbolic of Christ as our sinbearer like the image on the pole it helps us remember what Jesus did two thousand years ago. As the children of Israel looked forward to the cross for healing we look behind. Now the CC comes along and tells you that Jesus said to take a piece of bread and turn it into His actual body and to take wine and turn it into His actual blood and bow down before it because it is actually Him. So Jesus is standing right there and He is also a piece of bread and some wine and He tells them from now on i’m going to delegate people that have the power to turn this bread and wine into me and you are to worship this bread and wine instead of me. And as the council of Trent says it is through the intention of these delegates that this feat is acomplished. Not mind you, through the power of Christ working through these delegates but by thier own intention do these delegate priests accomlish this. So the CC teaches that the priests have the power to create God. Wow as I’m writing this out I’m getting a little ill. To think that you actually believe this.

As a Catholic I would agree with you that works are an important part of our salvation. Faith and works of grace have always been believed by the Church. But Catholics would disagree with you on soul sleep. That has never been believed. If I were a SDA I would want to test my beliefs with what was always believed throughout the centuries.

So you would test your beliefs with what man believes. Why? Aren’t you a man/woman. Do you think that because men believe something for a long time it must be true? My only source for the truth is the word of God. If you believe that you can’t go wrong.

When Isaiah was written it was not divided into chapters. It is all one thought. Isaiah 1 says this “The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz which he says concerning Judah and Jerusalem” Isaiah is all about Israel and the coming of the Messiah and His kingdom

Isaiah64:4For since the beginning of the world men have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, beside thee, what he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.

Third take a good look at this v. in Isaiah. The first phrase states “For since the beginning of the world men have not heard” Abraham is generally considered the father of the nation of Israel. So before Abraham there were no Jews. Now this statement certainly includes the Jews, but what Isaiah is bringing out is that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God not just the Jews.

I somewhat agree with you. We are not filthy rags. Paul tells us in 2 Cor. 2:15 “For we are the aroma of Christ” and in 2 Cor. 5:17 “therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation”

What Paul is talking about are Christians that accept the righteoussness of Christ. Without His righteousness Isaiah 64:6But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

The Church doesn’t say that the priest creates God.

Unfortunately, this is not the case. Cannon X1 of the council of Trent says In order for a sacrament to be valid, the intention of the priest must be present.

God makes HImself present when the priest says the words given to the Church by Christ “This is my body…This is my blood”.

The Council of Trent teaches that if the intention of the priest is not there saying those words would do nothing. So they teach that without that intention, the words of Christ have no power at all.

The intention of the priest is the intention of the Church.

How can you know this Third?

 

[rev_kevin]

rev, Can you tell me what verses in the bible tell us it is symbol and what is figrative,

Bill this is no answer to the questions asked now is it.

 

[Third_Day]

=Richard Kastner;6664568]Ya, see Third there’s a couple of differences here. First with the image on the pole. It was God who expressly told Moses to make this image

.And it was God that took bread and said “this IS my body…do THIS in rememberance of me”

Second, the people were not instructed to bow down to it, and third the image was completely symbolic, in that it was representative of Christ on the cross.

The people were healed when they looked at it. It was more than symbolic

God did give us the Lord’s supper, but unlike you we believe that the elements are symbolic of Christ as our sinbearer like the image on the pole it helps us remember what Jesus did two thousand years ago

.You refuse to take Christ at His words. You want to twist them. John 6 is clearly literal yet you do not have faith in his words. You walk away.

As the children of Israel looked forward to the cross for healing we look behind. Now the CC comes along and tells you that Jesus said to take a piece of bread and turn it into His actual body and to take wine and turn it into His actual blood and bow down before it because it is actually Him

.Jesus said to take bread and wine and change it into His body and blood not the Catholic Church.Your problem is that you don’t understand scripture. Jesus is the Lamb of God. He is the “paschal sacrifice” according to Paul. Just as the paschal lamb was to be eaten by the Old Covenant people of God, the New Covenant lamb is to be eaten. Christians have always believe this. Not believing this is a novelty.

So Jesus is standing right there and He is also a piece of bread and some wine and He tells them from now on i’m going to delegate people that have the power to turn this bread and wine into me and you are to worship this bread and wine instead of me

.
Jesus is the bread of life. He makes Himself present in the Eucharist.

And as the council of Trent says it is through the intention of these delegates that this feat is acomplished. Not mind you, through the power of Christ working through these delegates but by thier own intention do these delegate priests accomlish this. So the CC teaches that the priests have the power to create God. Wow as I’m writing this out I’m getting a little ill. To think that you actually believe this.

Show me a Church teaching that says “priests have the power to create God”. This is YOUR interpretation that comes because you haven’t accept the gift of faith.

So you would test your beliefs with what man believes. Why? Aren’t you a man/woman. Do you think that because men believe something for a long time it must be true? My only source for the truth is the word of God. If you believe that you can’t go wrong.

Your source of" truth "is Ellen G. White. She told you what you are to believe.

Isaiah64:4For since the beginning of the world men have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, beside thee, what he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.

Third take a good look at this v. in Isaiah. The first phrase states “For since the beginning of the world men have not heard” Abraham is generally considered the father of the nation of Israel. So before Abraham there were no Jews

.
That verse is talking about heaven. Paul repeats that verse in 1 Cor. 2:9

.

What Paul is talking about are Christians that accept the righteoussness of Christ. Without His righteousness Isaiah 64:6But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Once we are baptized we are not longer filty rags but children of God.

 

[Third_Day]

=Richard Kastner;6664602]Unfortunately, this is not the case. Cannon X1 of the council of Trent says In order for a sacrament to be valid, the intention of the priest must be present

.Show me a Church teaching that says “priests can create God”

The Council of Trent teaches that if the intention of the priest is not there saying those words would do nothing. So they teach that without that intention, the words of Christ have no power at all.

The priest represents Christ when he says “This is my body” If the priest does not have the intention then he is not representing Christ.

How can you know this Third?

The Church is Christ. “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me” The intention of the priest is the intention of Christ.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

.Show me a Church teaching that says “priests can create God”

CANON XI.-If any one saith, that, in ministers, when they effect, and confer the sacraments, there is not required the intention at least of doing what the Church does; let him be anathema. Here’s a link if you would like to read more. biblelight.net/intention.htm

The priest represents Christ when he says “This is my body” If the priest does not have the intention then he is not representing Christ.

This is exactly my point. The power to change the elements (according to the CC) comes from the intention of the priest, not from Christ.

The Church is Christ. “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me” The intention of the priest is the intention of Christ.

This statement is blaspheme. Jesus was alluding to His statement in Matt. 25:40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

 

[MariaG]

Miracles happen by faith. Miracles are from the power of God, but from the faith of the people.

The Eucharistic miracle is the greatest miracle of all.

If the priest does not have the intention, the faith, no miracle.

 

[Third_Day]

=Richard Kastner;6665333]CANON XI.-If any one saith, that, in ministers, when they effect, and confer the sacraments, there is not required the intention at least of doing what the Church does; let him be anathema. Here’s a link if you would like to read more. biblelight.net/intention.htm

This website seems to be from the Christadelphians. Are you with them or Sevent-Day Adventists? These Christadelphians believe that there is no devil, the soul is not immortal and they deny the Trinity. Real trust worthy site, RIchard

This is exactly my point. The power to change the elements (according to the CC) comes from the intention of the priest, not from Christ.

You don’t understand Catholic teaching. For example the site you showed me says this:
“Suppose that the priest who baptizes a child did not intend to “do as the Church does,” in granting the sacrament, then the child is not baptized, and no faith subsequently received, no works performed in the future can remove that original defect; according to the Catholic theory that man is not a Christian, and cannot be saved.”

Richard, Baptism doesn’t depend on the faith of the one pouring the water or putting the person under the water. If an atheist baptizes someone who desires and believes in baptism and the atheist says “I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” that baptism is VALID. **The power of the sacrament comes from God not from man.
**Your site said this:
“Suppose that when that man come to be married, the same priest performs the ceremony with the usual rites, but he does not intend to marry the couple, then in follows, that the sacrament of marriage has never been administered to”

Richard a priest or Protestant pastor does not marry people. He is only a witness. People marry themselves by the grace of God. What does scripture say? “What GOD has joined together, let no man put asunder”. It doesn’t say" what a priest has joined together"

This statement is blaspheme. Jesus was alluding to His statement in Matt. 25:40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

It’s not blasphemy, it is the gospel truth. Who was Saul persecutiong??? He was persecuting the The Church. **Jesus was in heaven **so what did Jesus mean when He said “Saul, why are you persecuting ME?”
Jesus was telling Paul that the Church he was persecutiong was HIM. The Church IS Christ.

 

[BILL_PICK53]

John Martignoni has an excellent response on his website (The Bible Christian Society). It’s short so I include it here.

Great answer but can you give me the chapter and verse that will say we are to take one verse as a Symbol and another as leterally,Thank You

 

[BILL_PICK53]

CANON XI.-If any one saith, that, in ministers, when they effect, and confer the sacraments, there is not required the intention at least of doing what the Church does; let him be anathema. Here’s a link if you would like to read more. biblelight.net/intention.htm

This is exactly my point. The power to change the elements (according to the CC) comes from the intention of the priest, not from Christ.

This statement is blaspheme. Jesus was alluding to His statement in Matt. 25:40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

 

[BILL_PICK53]

BILL_PICK53:
The gospel accourding to Richard.

 

[BILL_PICK53]

Bill this is no answer to the questions asked now is it.

rev, There is if you use a Cathloic Bible

 

[rev_kevin]

rev, There is if you use a Cathloic Bible

How in the world do you see this as a answer. You answered a question with a question. Sorry but that is no answer. This is no answer eather. I have the complete Bible, which includes the Catholic parts of the Bible. It has 80 different books in it, more than the Catholic Bible has. Will you please answer the question directly and stop dodging it. I also noticed that you made a different thread about the question. So I must conclude that you don’t have a answer to my question.

 

[rev_kevin]

This website seems to be from the Christadelphians. Are you with them or Sevent-Day Adventists? These Christadelphians believe that there is no devil, the soul is not immortal and they deny the Trinity. Real trust worthy site, RIchard

You don’t understand Catholic teaching. For example the site you showed me says this:
“Suppose that the priest who baptizes a child did not intend to “do as the Church does,” in granting the sacrament, then the child is not baptized, and no faith subsequently received, no works performed in the future can remove that original defect; according to the Catholic theory that man is not a Christian, and cannot be saved.”

Richard, Baptism doesn’t depend on the faith of the one pouring the water or putting the person under the water. If an atheist baptizes someone who desires and believes in baptism and the atheist says “I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” that baptism is VALID. **The power of the sacrament comes from God not from man.
**Your site said this:
“Suppose that when that man come to be married, the same priest performs the ceremony with the usual rites, but he does not intend to marry the couple, then in follows, that the sacrament of marriage has never been administered to”

Richard a priest or Protestant pastor does not marry people. He is only a witness. People marry themselves by the grace of God. What does scripture say? “What GOD has joined together, let no man put asunder”. It doesn’t say" what a priest has joined together"

It’s not blasphemy, it is the gospel truth. Who was Saul persecutiong??? He was persecuting the The Church. **Jesus was in heaven **so what did Jesus mean when He said “Saul, why are you persecuting ME?”
Jesus was telling Paul that the Church he was persecutiong was HIM. The Church IS Christ.

I must correct you on something here. You said that a atheist can baptize if he/she says I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spitit and the baptism is valid. This is correct only in the case of an emergency, a emergency only, not in everyday baptism. Any believer in Christ can baptize someone.

On the marriage thing. Why is it that if you aren’t married by a Catholic priest, the marriage is invalid in the eyes of the Church? You are not married according to the CC.
So anyone can marry a couple because the preson preforming the cerimony is only a witness?
If God is the one who marries then why do you need a priest or a minister to marry someone? Couldn’t anyone do that?
So If I gave someone the words to marry someone and the do it the marriage is valid because God is the one how marries?

I agree with your last statement here, the church is Christ. Christ is the only church not the CC, not Baptist or anyother denomination, only Christ.

 

[Third_Day]

=rev kevin;6668630]I must correct you on something here. You said that a atheist can baptize if he/she says I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spitit and the baptism is valid. This is correct only in the case of an emergency, a emergency only, not in everyday baptism. Any believer in Christ can baptize someone.

The Catholic Church agrees with you Rev. That is the exception not the rule

On the marriage thing. Why is it that if you aren’t married by a Catholic priest, the marriage is invalid in the eyes of the Church? You are not married according to the CC.

The Church is Christ therefore there must be a witness to the marriage by a priest or deacon. Christ gave the sacrament of marriage to the Church and the Church with the authority to bind and loose has decided it will accept marriages with a Protestant pastor as a witness. If you are Catholic, however, you are bound by the rules of the Church and you must have a priest or deacon as your witness.

So anyone can marry a couple because the preson preforming the cerimony is only a witness?

No, The witness must be from the Church or someone who the Church has given the authority to witness such as a Protestant pastor (in the case of non-Catholics)

If God is the one who marries then why do you need a priest or a minister to marry someone? Couldn’t anyone do that?

THe Church must witness to what God has joined together. That is part of Sacred Tradition.

So If I gave someone the words to marry someone and the do it the marriage is valid because God is the one how marries?

If you are a valid minister then yes. If one of those being married is a Catholic then no. There must be a representative of the Church there also or you must get permission from the Bishop to do otherwise. It all goes back to Jesus giving His Church the authority when He said to His Church “whatever YOU (Peter, James, John etc) bind on earth is bound in heaven”

I agree with your last statement here, the church is Christ. Christ is the only church not the CC, not Baptist or anyother denomination, only Christ.

No. The Catholic Church is the body of Christ, she and she alone is Christ who established only ONE Church and He can only have ONE body. If you are baptized you are in the body of Christ and part of HIs ONE Church. The Baptist, Methodist etc denominations are NOT the Church. It’s members are part of the body of Christ but the denomination itself is man-made and therefore not the Church. Jesus can have only one bride or He would be an adulterer.

 

[Big_Dummy]

I am guessing that non catholics interpret John 6 the way they do via common sense. They look in the cup and all they see is wine. I am guessing if they looked in the cup and saw every time that the wine became literally blood, then they would likely take John 6 literally.

 

[Third_Day]

I am guessing that non catholics interpret John 6 the way they do via common sense. They look in the cup and all they see is wine. I am guessing if they looked in the cup and saw every time that the wine became literally blood, then they would likely take John 6 literally.

In other words you are a “doubting Thomas”. What did Jesus say to the apostle Thomas? “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe”. (John 20:29)

John 6 is speaking of a miracle just like the miracle of the loaves and fishes. It is no accident that John gives us the miracle of the loaves and fishes right before he gives us the miracle of what would become known as the Eucharist., the bread and wine changed into the body and blood of Christ.

 

[Des]

First with the image on the pole. It was God who expressly told Moses to make this image.

Seems you just contradicted yourself when you said this.

"That’s just it. I don’t believe Christ would teach us to violate one of His commandments."

I also wish to ask if you have a graven image of the Cross carved on your Bible.

Second, the people were not instructed to bow down to it,

They were instructed to gaze upon it however showing us that using an image to assist you in venerating is acceptable. The act of bowing down was only if done in worshiping a graven image. They are interconnected. If you wish to separate them, then bowing down to all forms would have to go.

So you would test your beliefs with what man believes. Why? Aren’t you a man/woman. Do you think that because men believe something for a long time it must be true? My only source for the truth is the word of God. If you believe that you can’t go wrong.

Your faith comes from a Church not even 200 years old. Your study comes from how you wish to perceive it. Your ‘My only source for the truth is the Word of God’ line is said by all protestants yet your SDA church is viewed by many of your protestant brethren as a cult. Hmmmm, but both sides insist your truths come from the Word of God so I guess everybody’s right.

In reality, the only thing that comes about from Scripture alone is utter chaos.