Is the "Real Presence" real?

[c659smith]

---

I asked you a question to give me the history of the 7th day adventists as you made a statement on the history of the Catholic Church. Now I even told ans showed you that the history I gave you of the Catholic Church was om an adventist site.

FOR PROTESTANT 101
Please show me how far back Adventist go

Show me the first time the word 7th day adventist is used in the bible.

Your minister will not even argue that the bible was written by Catholic Christians.

Well if you will not show mw let me show you where 7th day adventist come from,

SEVENTH-DAY Adventism sprang out of a false prediction of the Second Coming. William Miller (1782–1849), a Baptist minister, had interpreted the 2,300-day prophecy of Daniel 8:14 as indicating that the year of Christ’s return to Earth would be 1843 (later revised to 1844). He ignored the New Testament warning that “no one knows about that day or hour” (Matt. 24:36).

When Christ failed to return, Miller withdrew from setting dates, but some of his followers were not so willing to confess error. They insisted the end was imminent. They re-interpreted the prophecy to mean Christ’s heavenly ministry had entered a new phase in 1844. Several leaders of this group, through a series of “theological insights” confirmed by the visions of Ellen Gould White (1827–1915), who was thought a prophetess, formed the Seventh-day Adventist denomination.

One of these “theological insights,” that Christians are required to observe the Jewish Sabbath, led Seventh-day Adventists to conclude they were God’s movement for the last days. Just as the Reformers believed they had recovered the principle of justification by faith, Seventh-day Adventists believed they have rescued God’s Law from Catholic corruptions.

Even though Seventh-day Adventism had much of its origins in Baptist theology, it is considered heterodox by Fundamentalists and Evangelicals, many of whom consider Seventh-day Adventism a non-Christian cult because of its doctrinal deviations.

Adventists are fond of quoting Ecclesiastes 3:19–21 and other Old Testament passages which seem to indicate there is no afterlife. These passages are either written from a human point of view, or they are based on the incomplete revelation the Israelites had concerning the afterlife. It was only when Jesus brought “life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10) that it became clear what the state of the soul is after death.

The Bible teaches the eternal duration of hell. Jesus says in Matthew 25:46, “They will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life:” If Adventists concede eternal life is never-ending, they must also concede eternal punishment is never-ending.

I figured I would save you the typing.

 

[fellowChristian]

Yes; but you don’t eat Jesus.

Yes I do.

Christians believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God.

Christians believe in one God that exists in three persons, the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit.

Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ walked this earth, fully God, and yet fully man

Christians believe that after His death on the cross, Christ was buried, He rose again, and now lives at the right hand of the Father, making intercession for the believers forever

But not…

“Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’” (Matthew 26:26-28)

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”

-1 Cor. 10:16-17

“For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, ‘This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.”

**-1 Cor. 11:23-27 **

 

[c659smith]

NEXT

 

[Protestant101]

I asked you a question to give me the history of the 7th day adventists as you made a statement on the history of the Catholic Church. Now I even told ans showed you that the history I gave you of the Catholic Church was om an adventist site.

Please show me how far back Adventist go

Show me the first time the word 7th day adventist is used in the bible.

Your minister will not even argue that the bible was written by Catholic Christians.

Actually, all Christians, from all churches, share the same heritage/lineage. It is neither realistic or fair to exclude all members of the human race from being in the first church, or early church; except for Catholics. In other words, both Adventist and catholics have always been around, just under different names. They have obviously gone off in different directions, and to me it would be impossible to prove “who was first.” Lots of groups would so love to make that distinction about themselves, and yet the whole exercise thereof is so pointless, as we all came from the same place.

You might be interested to know that people in the Adventist Church come from every nation on earth, and from many different denominations and other faith backgrounds; especially lots from the catholic Church. This is part of why we make the claims about being the Remnant Church, not the first Church. Truth is progressive, in that we learn more as we study, over time.

Yes, you may dig up a minister to say that the Bible “was written by Catholics;” but the Bible tells us that it was written by God, it is revealed in it’s very name: “The Word of God.”

 

[fellowChristian]

ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH

**St. Ignatius became the third bishop of Antioch, succeeding St. Evodius, who was the immediate successor of St. Peter. He heard St. John preach when he was a boy and knew St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. Seven of his letters written to various Christian communities have been preserved. Eventually, he received the martyr’s crown as he was thrown to wild beasts in the arena. **

“Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”
**
“Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D. **

“Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ.”

**-“Letter to the Ephesians”, paragraph 20, c. 80-110 A.D. **

“I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire **His Blood **which is love that cannot be destroyed.”

**-“Letter to the Romans”, paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D. **

“Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons.”

**-Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D. **

 

[fellowChristian]

Quakers

Who founded it?

George Fox in 1649

What was he before that?

Presbyterian

Who founded it?

John Knox in 1560

What was he before that?

Calvinist

Who founded it?

John Calvin in 1555

What was he before that?

Catholic

 

[fellowChristian]

Amish

Who founded it?

Jacob Amman in 1693

What was he before that?

Mennonite

Who founded that?

Menno Simons in 1525

What was he before that?

Anabaptist

Who founded that?

Thomas Munzer and Nicholas Storch in 1521

What were they before that?

Catholic

 

[fellowChristian]

Pentecostal

Who founded it?

Charles Fox Parham in 1901

What was he before?

Methodist

Who founded it?

James and Charles Wesley in 1744

What were they?

Church of England

Who started it?

King Henry the VIII in 1534

What was he before?

Catholic

 

[Protestant101]

Yes I do.

Christians believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God.

Christians believe in one God that exists in three persons, the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit.

Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ walked this earth, fully God, and yet fully man

Christians believe that after His death on the cross, Christ was buried, He rose again, and now lives at the right hand of the Father, making intercession for the believers forever

But not…

“Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’” (Matthew 26:26-28)

Who can deny how that this was purely a dedication of all present to God the father, who only could get them each through what was to come to pass shortly on Calvary?

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”

“Participation” is the wrong word to use here. The Bible (Jesus), tells us that we are to do it “in remembrance.” Only His shed blood on Calvary could be a suitable sacrifice for which the cup of blessing was used to dedicate people to God.

-1 Cor. 10:16-17

“For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, ‘This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.”

Once again, Paul follows Jesus’ lead in saying to take the cup “in remembrance” (an act of dedication/renewal to God), nothing to do with any “literal presence” in the bread or wine; but in our hearts.

**-1 Cor. 11:23-27 **

 

[c659smith]

Actually, all Christians, from all churches, share the same heritage/lineage. It is neither realistic or fair to exclude all members of the human race from being in the first church, or early church; except for Catholics. In other words, both Adventist and catholics have always been around, just under different names. They have obviously gone off in different directions, and to me it would be impossible to prove “who was first.” Lots of groups would so love to make that distinction about themselves, and yet the whole exercise thereof is so pointless, as we all came from the same place.

You might be interested to know that people in the Adventist Church come from every nation on earth, and from many different denominations and other faith backgrounds; especially lots from the catholic Church. This is part of why we make the claims about being the Remnant Church, not the first Church. Truth is progressive, in that we learn more as we study, over time.

Yes, you may dig up a minister to say that the Bible “was written by Catholics;” but the Bible tells us that it was written by God, it is revealed in it’s very name: “The Word of God.”

Your ancestors were Catholic–you need to come back home-Jesus created one Church not Churches

 

[fellowChristian]

Seventh Day Adventist

Who founded it?

James And Ellen White in 1844

What were they before?

Millerites

Who founded it?

William Miller in 1830-1840

What was he before?

Baptist

Who founded it?

John Smith and Thomas Hewys in 1609

What were they before?

Puritans

Which broke off from the

Church of England

Who started it?

King Henry the VIII in 1534

What was he before?

Catholic

 

[c659smith]

Your ancestors were Catholic–you need to come back home-Jesus created one Church not Churches

Man makes mistakes and wrong choices in Catholic and protestant Churches.

But it is clear Catholic is the Church of Christ. One Church --universal–Holy==Apostolic

 

[Protestant101]

Your ancestors were Catholic–you need to come back home-Jesus created one Church not Churches

LOL, you need to join The Remnant; and join the many thousands from Catholicism who have also done so.

The so called history that you posted about us (post # 220 I think) is just stuff you hurriedly cut and pasted from an anti-Adventist hate site; it was just a “turkey-shoot” at some of our beliefs. It had nothing to do with our inspiring history. I think you can likely do a lot better than that, and find a truly Adventist site to quote from.:tiphat:

 

[c659smith]

PROTESTANT 101

What do you notice about scripture here.

Is the protestant Churches divided amongst themselves?

Are there not over 30,000 denominations of protestanism?

14 One day Jesus cast out a demon from a man who couldn’t speak, and when the demon was gone, the man began to speak. The crowds were amazed, 15 but some of them said, “No wonder he can cast out demons. He gets his power from Satan,[f] the prince of demons.” 16 Others, trying to test Jesus, demanded that he show them a miraculous sign from heaven to prove his authority.
17 He knew their thoughts, so he said, “Any kingdom divided by civil war is doomed. A family splintered by feuding will fall apart. 18 You say I am empowered by Satan. But if Satan is divided and fighting against himself, how can his kingdom survive? 19 And if I am empowered by Satan, what about your own exorcists? They cast out demons, too, so they will condemn you for what you have said. 20 But if I am casting out demons by the power of God,[g] then the Kingdom of God has arrived among you. 21 For when a strong man like Satan is fully armed and guards his palace, his possessions are safe—22 until someone even stronger attacks and overpowers him, strips him of his weapons, and carries off his belongings.

23 “Anyone who isn’t with me opposes me, and anyone who isn’t working with me is actually working against me.

 

[c659smith]

Protestant101:
Now is what is below scipture? I would like an answer?

You must read the bible as a whole to get the picture.
Now I am not adding or deleting anything in scripture and nor is the Catholic Church here and I say here because I want the subject to stay on the subject and not wave in different directions.

Jesus was explicit throughout the New Testament and Direct when it came to this subject as well as His Apostles. The people that knew Him best.

Jesus did not stop and explain His statement as He did all if not most others as it is what it is. Many a follower was left behind because of His truth on this issue.

Christ will not explain any of the verses to you on this subject. I will not interpet and neither did Christ. For what He said was truth. It is what It is.

Now read and to not use conjecture ,interpetation, or what you feel. Tell me what Jesus said explicitly.

For if you add or take away from this book there is a special place for you.

The Eucharist

Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: **"‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52). **
Many left and Jesus did not say wait it’s only a symbol but let them leave and asked the Apostles are you going to leave also?

His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: **“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” (John 6:53–56). **

even Paul writes,

**“Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor. 11:27, **29). “To answer for the body and blood” of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine “unworthily” be so serious? Paul’s comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ.

Did I write scripture here?

Was Jesus kidding around here?

Did Jesus loose all those people because he did not explain Himself?

That would be rather rude don’t you think?

 

[c659smith]

LOL, you need to join The Remnant; and join the many thousands from Catholicism who have also done so.

The so called history that you posted about us (post # 220 I think) is just stuff you hurriedly cut and pasted from an anti-Adventist hate site; it was just a “turkey-shoot” at some of our beliefs. It had nothing to do with our inspiring history. I think you can likely do a lot better than that, and find a truly Adventist site to quote from.:tiphat:

Well then stop whinning and give me the 7th day adventist history.

If I am wrong than stand up like a man and defend your sect.

You give us the history of your Church.

I gave you mine.

 

[teadough]

Protestant101

What do SDA’s teach about Michael the Archangel ?

 

[junietan]

I didn’t ask you to “revisit” “everything” of anything. All I asked is that you give the quote where I allegedly called Catholics “Cannibals.” Is there something you don’t understand about that Sir? As far as I can see, I am on topic, since you accused me publicly here of calling catholics “cannibals;” in relation to something I posted earlier. There are some questions and confusions about cannibalism that can and do arise with many sincere searching people when they read the Catholic take on transubstantiation. But people with whom such questions arise, have done nothing wrong therein, nor are they usually calling Catholics Cannibals. Now; I am not that nieve that I do not know that a true Catholic would never commit such an atrocious act; I personally know many Catholics, they might want to yell at me sometimes; but I KNOW they would never put me in their soup pot!! Catholics do owe the public a sensible explanation about this; because to the unlearned, it does sound really bizzarre and confusing. I guess it’s up to you what you do with that; but I would hope that you could dispense with the accusations of “anti-Catholic” or “heretic.” They simply do not apply in this case. It is very difficult to reconcile “eating Jesus’ literal flesh” with the definition of cannibalism. Catholics are the ones saying they literally eat His flesh, not me. Besides; what catholics say “the flesh” does when 'eaten" during the Eucharist, is what Jesus says ONLY the blood is needed for; and that was accomplished on Calvary. No repeat performance such as the Eucharist can improve upon Christ’s “once for all” sacrifice.

The application of that Blood, as the Scriptures note, is NOT done by any Priest, and their “daily ministering,” through the Eucharist. “The same sacrifices” which the Priest offers "can NEVER take away sins."

---

Heb 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.

It was with His blood, not His “flesh.”

Take note: Our LORD JESUS CHRIST never said, THAT this is the symbol of MY BODY AND BLOOD but HE said, this is MY ( LITERAL AND TRUE ) BODY AND BLOOD.
1.Please read the Holy Gospel of St. John chapter 6: verses 22 to 71 **
to have a clearer overview of the BODY AND BLOOD – The HOLY EUCHARIST.
John 6: 53 Jesus said to them**, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. ( **please, let’s check our Holy Bible **)
2. It’s true that in Hebrew 10: 11, sacrifices can never take away sins. And is referring to
Hebrew 10: 4, for it is **impossible that the blood of bulls and goats **take away sins.
3. if truly, one believed that Holy Bible is the WORD OF GOD ( John 1: 1 )
One would have read the Holy Gospel of St. John chapter 6: verses 22 to 71 and have preach IT, ( HIM )
Question to Protestant 101: Why are you not preaching the whole GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN? if truly believed, that IT ( HE ) is the WORD OF GOD.
Thank you and GOD Bless…

 

[fellowChristian]

The Early Christians Believed in the Real Presence

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR

“This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.”

" First Apology", Ch. 66, inter** A.D. 148-155. **

**ST. AUGUSTINE **

“You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ.”

-“Sermons”, 227, 21]

ST. JEROME

“After the type had been fulfilled by the Passover celebration and He had eaten the flesh of the lamb with His Apostles, He takes bread which strengthens the heart of man, and goes on to the true Sacrament of the Passover, so that just as Melchisedech, the priest of the Most High God, in prefiguring Him, made bread and wine an offering, He too makes Himself manifest in the reality of His own Body and Blood.”

-“Commentaries on the Gospel of Matthew” [4,26,26] 398 A.D.

Thats over **1,446 **years before Ellen White and over 1,119 years before the
Protestant Reformation.

And from that time and before,all the way till now 2008, the Catholic Church continues to teach that this is true.

 

[mikew262]

Not this Catholic and I think you are being a little prejudice for you said Church going Protestants and used Catholics as a whole group.
Compare Church going Catholics to Church going Protestants and I do not think you will find much of a difference.

What the Protestants memorize is the parts of the bible only that can defend or justify themselves as in faith alone and the Eucharists this is necessary for them to keep their members.

What is lost is the parts of the bible or the total chapter as to what the Apostle is really talking about.

Ask a Protestant what the bible says about confession, abortion, divorce, works, etc… and they are lost.

Again, I disagree. Many Catholics only hear Scripture on Sunday read by the Lector (sp?) or priest. Many Protestants read their Bible daily and go to Bible Study, and have Weds services. This is not say some Catholics aren’t daily Bible readers either, but I think the Protestants have us beat in this area.