Jesus quoting the Deutero Canonicals

[Old_Scholar]

The problem is you do not interpret certain Scriptures the same as the Apostolic Chuch does.

Much of it is very literal and doesn’t need any special “interpretation.” That’s the problem. Many “interpret” it to say what they want. I believe I am interpreting it correctly and I certainly can read the literal writings.

You can believe whatever you want but you should at least read it yourself and see how it compares with what you are told it says…Scripture tells us to do that you know.

 

[adstrinity]

It is my understanding that the laity does not get to drink the wine, which represents the blood of Christ.

That understanding is wrong. The laity has the option to drink the blood of Christ. I have. As a matter of fact, that is all some HAVE done. Those with Celiac Disease can only drink the Blood, lest they should have a bad reaction.

Furthermore, please understand, that in each crumb of the wafer, in each drop of the wine, once concecrated, has the whole of Jesus’ Body, Blood, Soul, & Divinity.

Getting back to the Biblical Question at hand, has anybody been able to point out anything Jesus said of the Deutero Canonical Books that has not been pointed out to possibly refer to anything in the incomplete Protestant translation of the Bible?

 

[Lampo]

Since Christ Himself has said, “This is My Body” who shall dare to doubt that It is His Body?
– St. Cyril of Jerusalem

 

[ziapueblo]

Old Scholar,

If you trust the Bible then you trust the Traditions and the authority of the Catholic Church. It is a source outside of the Bible in which the Bible itself was put together. There is no inspired table of contents! No where in Scripture is it written what belongs in the Bible!

Quotation does not equal canonicity! If that was true we would have 11 books taken out of the Protocanonical Books and would have added another letter of St. Paul’s, the Book of Enoch, and much more.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I don’t see anything here against what Scripture teaches.

Of course not, the Catholic Church is completely Scriptural!

If you are saying that Ignatius is saying that the bread actually turns into the flesh of Christ, then you are reading it wrong. It is a symbolic event and all Christians should celebrate it exactly as Christ told us to do. The wine represents the blood and the bread represents the flesh.

No St Ignatious is saying that. Read it again. He is saying:They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ,

But isn’t it true that the RCC does not do that? It is my understanding that the laity does not get to drink the wine, which represents the blood of Christ. Why is that? Certainly that must be a man-made tradition. The Bible tells us to do both…

You are wrong, we get both. Christ is complete in either the host or wine, you get his entire body, blood, and divinity in either. You are making man-made assumptions about the Scriptural practices of the Catholic Church.

Read what Christ Himself called it, AFTER He said this is my blood:

Matt 26:26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27) And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28) For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29) But I say unto you,* I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine,*** until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

Yes, the fourth cup, the cup of blessing, he drank it on the cross in John 19:29-30
*29
There was a vessel filled with common wine. So they put a sponge soaked in wine on a sprig of hyssop and put it up to his mouth.
30
When Jesus had taken the wine, he said, “It is finished.” *

Jesus’ work on earth was finished. The kingdom of Heaven is now on Earth. (They kingdom come on earth as it is in Heaven). Interestingly, the hyssop was the branch that was used on the Passover to sprinkle the blood on the lintels of the Isrealites.

Notice Christ does not call it His blood, but what it really is: wine. However, it still represents His blood as He said. It just doesn’t really turn into his blood and the bread doesn’t really turn into his flesh./quote]Matt 26:26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. 27) And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28) For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Depends on your definition of IS is.
Old Scholar;3704930:

You must remember that Christ often said He was "the BREAD of life and used this term frequently. He was speaking figuratively.

Says who, you? Tell me why didn’t he run after the disciples who left him due to a misunderstanding? I see lots of places where Jesus uses parables to explain things. When they don’t understand the parables, he takes pains to explain the meanings (see Sower and Seed).

 

[qui_est_ce]

Much of it is very literal and doesn’t need any special “interpretation.”

I agree That’s the problem.

Many “interpret” it to say what they want.

So true.

I believe I am interpreting it correctly and I certainly can read the literal writings.

, so why should your interpretation trump mine?

You can believe whatever you want but you should at least read it yourself and see how it compares with what you are told it says…Scripture tells us to do that you know.

Yes, it does, and yes I do. I have been in Bible studies for over 10 years, Catholic and non-Denominational. I went to Jesuit University. I’ve been going to mass since I was a baby (even baptized, (see my signature), so I’ve been spoon fed on Scripture my entire life. The non-Catholic Bible study people knew a lot about the Catholic Church, even more than me. They were constantly telling me that Catholics don’t read the Bible…

 

[sodak]

I repeat, all the references that were listed are, in most part, just jokes.

…]

This is just another case of believing what you have been told and not checking the actual history for yourselves…

I find most of your posts similarly amusing, especially considering the username you selected. Have you even read the many references that people have given you?

 

[Lampo]

If you are saying that Ignatius is saying that the bread actually turns into the flesh of Christ, then you are reading it wrong.

Would I be reading this quote from St. Justin the Martyr wrong if I think he is saying the bread and wine actually turns into the flesh of Christ?

“For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (c. A.D. 110-165).

 

[BRB]

That was the reason for the Reformation; to get the church back on track.

Get the Catholic Universal Church back on track ??

So, you believe God used the Reformation to reorganize/revitalize/refocus the Catholic Church ?

Sounds like good logic to me. After 1500 plus years … a little provocation from a Catholic monk may of done us some good. If nothing else … it gave impetus to the formation of good ole USA.

However, unless your Church of God can clearly show us a lineage back over last 2000 years outside of Catholic Church] … its high time all the Protestants come back home and rejoin the Universal Church. Christ wants you rebels to read some history and come back into the fullness of faith and enjoy all 7 sacraments.

 

[BRB]

ziapueblo

I have already stated that my church is the same apostolic church that Christ began through the apostles. We teach exactly what the apostles taught and no other doctrine or sacrament that cannot be found in Scripture. The Church of God.

:

Give us more specifics on your Church. What was Garner Ted Armstrong’s church called ? He used to have that radio program called … The World Tomorrow.

You’re not with that group are you ?

 

[HamtramckSteve]

If you are saying that Ignatius is saying that the bread actually turns into the flesh of Christ, then you are reading it wrong. It is a symbolic event and all Christians should celebrate it exactly as Christ told us to do. The wine represents the blood and the bread represents the flesh.

You’re right, Old Scholar. Ignatius must mean it’s a symbolic event, just like St. Paul says it’s a symbolic event in 1 Corinthians 11 29-30 (I used the KJV just for you!)

11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

11:30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Oh, wait. What does St. Paul mean about unworthily and not discerning the body?

And what’s this? That’s why many in Corinth are weak and sick and some died? Because they ate a symbol?

Yikes. If it’s only a symbol, why would we end up with damnation, sickness and death? Sounds like God treats it more seriously than a symbol.

 

[anthony022071]

So you are going to believe what someone wrote almost 400 years after Christ???

 

[anthony022071]

I don’t see anything here against what Scripture teaches. If you are saying that Ignatius is saying that the bread actually turns into the flesh of Christ, then you are reading it wrong. It is a symbolic event and all Christians should celebrate it exactly as Christ told us to do. The wine represents the blood and the bread represents the flesh.

 

[BRB]

Notice Christ does not call it His blood, but what it really is: wine. However, it still represents His blood as He said. It just doesn’t really turn into his blood and the bread doesn’t really turn into his flesh.

You must remember that Christ often said He was "the BREAD of life and used this term frequently. He was speaking figuratively.

O.S. … Catholics refer to the Eucharist as the ‘non-bloody’ sacrifice. When we drink from the cup … we see and taste wine. When we take the bread … we see and taste the bread.

If we were to chemically analyze the blessed hosts in a lab … a scientist would only find wine and bread.

But, the essense of Christ is within the substance of the earthly food and beverage. One who partakes of the Eucharist in faith with proper understanding of Christ within … will perceive ALL of Christ in the sacrament. Body/blood/ and H.S.

Since you don’t currently have the faith to accept the Eucharist for what it really is … it does you no good. You receive neither spiritual / physical healing, nor forgiveness of venial sins when you partake on strictly ‘symbolic’ basis.

You are probably not bringing harm on yourself — as Paul talks about… because you have been partaking in ignorance. But, now that you know you are in error … in the future you could potentially do yourself harm, if you continue to partake in unbelief.

 

[Lampo]

Notice Christ does not call it His blood,…

Matt. 26:27-28: "Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood…”

 

[Old_Scholar]

Why is that an issue for you? You believe what someone wrote 1,500 years after Christ.

If someone was writing today and saying it was the word of Christ, then I would question it.

 

[Old_Scholar]

The problem is you do not interpret certain Scriptures the same as the Apostolic Chuch does.

Give me an example please…and be sure it is from an apostolic church. That would require it to teach exactly what the apostles taught, with nothing added or subtracted…

 

[Old_Scholar]

That understanding is wrong. The laity has the option to drink the blood of Christ. I have. As a matter of fact, that is all some HAVE done. Those with Celiac Disease can only drink the Blood, lest they should have a bad reaction.

Furthermore, please understand, that in each crumb of the wafer, in each drop of the wine, once concecrated, has the whole of Jesus’ Body, Blood, Soul, & Divinity.

Getting back to the Biblical Question at hand, has anybody been able to point out anything Jesus said of the Deutero Canonical Books that has not been pointed out to possibly refer to anything in the incomplete Protestant translation of the Bible?

I have watched mass on television many times, especially special ones from Rome and the larger churches in the US and I have never seen drinking from the cup allowed for the laity. I feel certain there are certain places where it is done, but why not everywhere since that was the command of Christ?

As for the apocrypha, no one has ever been able to show where Jesus quoted anything from the apocryphal books.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Give me an example please…and be sure it is from an apostolic church. That would require it to teach exactly what the apostles taught, with nothing added or subtracted…

The Real Presence in the Eucharist. The Canon of the Bible.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I have watched mass on television many times, especially special ones from Rome and the larger churches in the US and I have never seen drinking from the cup allowed for the laity. I feel certain there are certain places where it is done, but why not everywhere since that was the command of Christ?

As for the apocrypha, no one has ever been able to show where Jesus quoted anything from the apocryphal books.

Hello, we do it every Sunday in our Church. Some people prefer not to drink from the cup. The entire body blood and divinity of christ are in each.

youtube.com/watch?v=F3K35efx_w4

Go to 7:50 on this video, you will clearly see the cup presented to the faithful.