Many Adams and Eves?

[ricmat]

Ed, do you believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist?

Chemically bread and wine are bread and wine both before and after consecration; chemically it does not become human flesh and blood. Theologically, however, the eucharistic elements become the flesh and blood of Christ. Chemistry and theology coexist.

The Truth is that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. The Truth cannot also be that Christ is not present in the Eucharist. Which truth do you pick StA? You can’t have both.

 

[StAnastasia]

In process…

Good! Randy Isaac or Margaret Towne are good contacts within ASA.

 

[StAnastasia]

The Truth is that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. .

Of course! Chemically the eucharistic elements are bread and wine, which in no way impeaches the real presence.

 

[edwest2]

Ed, do you believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist?

Chemically bread and wine are bread and wine both before and after consecration; chemically it does not become human flesh and blood. Theologically, however, the eucharistic elements become the flesh and blood of Christ. Chemistry and theology coexist.

I understand what you are saying but you appear to be missing a key point. How long does it take for the grape to become aged fine wine? Jesus did it instantly. Making matter out of thin air? Jesus multiplied the loaves and fishes. Jesus can make wine, with the appearance and taste of age instantly.

Reality and reality can be instantly changed or created by God.

God bless,
Ed

 

[ricmat]

Of course! Chemically the eucharistic elements are bread and wine, which in no way impeaches the real presence.

So you agree that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist.

So in this case of Catholic dogma in opposition to scientific theory, the Catholic dogma wins.

I thought you said they can co-exist. Maybe you used the wrong example to show that.

 

[buffalo]

I understand what you are saying but you appear to be missing a key point. How long does it take for the grape to become aged fine wine? Jesus did it instantly. Making matter out of thin air? Jesus multiplied the loaves and fishes. Jesus can make wine, with the appearance and taste of age instantly.

Reality and reality can be instantly changed or created by God.

God bless,
Ed

Here is a fine argument against a deceiver God.

 

[StAnastasia]

So you agree that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist.

So in this case of Catholic dogma in opposition to scientific theory, the Catholic dogma wins.

No, they both win – it’s win-win.

 

[ricmat]

The Truth is that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. The Truth cannot also be that Christ is not present in the Eucharist. Which truth do you pick StA? You can’t have both.

No, they both win – it’s win-win.

Typical!

 

[diggerdomer]

That is not an answer.

Is Catholicism true?

Depends on exactly what you mean by Catholicism.

God is true. The fullness of truth subsists in the Catholic Church, though elements of truth exist also outside the visible structure of the Catholic Church.

 

[diggerdomer]

So you agree that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist.

So in this case of Catholic dogma in opposition to scientific theory, the Catholic dogma wins.

I thought you said they can co-exist. Maybe you used the wrong example to show that.

No Catholic dogma opposes science, meaning, faith is not in opposition to reason. If there’s a scientific theory that claims Christ is not truly present in the Eucharist, then yes, that scientific theory would be in opposition to Catholic dogma. But there’s no such scientific theory, is there?

 

[StAnastasia]

No Catholic dogma opposes science, meaning, faith is not in opposition to reason. If there’s a scientific theory that claims Christ is not truly present in the Eucharist, then yes, that scientific theory would be in opposition to Catholic dogma. But there’s no such scientific theory, is there?

None that I know of.

 

[diggerdomer]

To my brothers and sisters in Christ. I hope the following will help this discussion:

logosinstitute.org/LR4_Beyond_Creationism_Logos_Review.pdf

God bless,
Ed

thanks for sharing. Interesting, but not helpful. Nothing I hadn’t heard before. And seemed heavily biased to teachings only up to Pius XII, which is too bad.

 

[diggerdomer]

None that I know of.

Right

 

[ricmat]

How about when a Catholic dogma is in conflict with a scientific theory?

They coexist.

Both can be true, even though they say opposite things.

No Catholic dogma opposes science, meaning, faith is not in opposition to reason. If there’s a scientific theory that claims Christ is not truly present in the Eucharist, then yes, that scientific theory would be in opposition to Catholic dogma. But there’s no such scientific theory, is there?

None that I know of.

StA says that both Catholic dogma which is in conflict with a scientific theory can both be true, even though they say opposite things.

She offered up the real presence as an example of how this “both can be true even though they say opposite things.”

Now you claim that you know of no instances where there is a conflict? Right.

How about the dogma of a single set of parents from whom we originated, versus the scientific theory that says that “it’s not so.” Which one is Truth. They both can’t be True since they say opposite things.

 

[buffalo]

StA says that both Catholic dogma which is in conflict with a scientific theory can both be true, even though they say opposite things.

She offered up the real presence as an example of how this “both can be true even though they say opposite things.”

Now you claim that you know of no instances where there is a conflict? Right.

How about the dogma of a single set of parents from whom we originated, versus the scientific theory that says that “it’s not so.” Which one is Truth. They both can’t be True since they say opposite things.

In StA’s “multiverse” they both can be true.

 

[ricmat]

In StA’s “multiverse” they both can be true.

Multi-verse - essential for the secular creation myth.

 

[StAnastasia]

StA says that both Catholic dogma which is in conflict with a scientific theory can both be true, even though they say opposite things. She offered up the real presence as an example of how this “both can be true even though they say opposite things.”

Unless you deny the real presence, both are true: (1) Christ is really present in the sacrament, and (2) chemical analysis of the eucharistic elements would show them to be bread and wine.

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

In StA’s “multiverse” they both can be true.

No, you don’t need a multiverse to believe in the real presence of Christ in the eucharist. It works in this universe as well.

 

[ricmat]

The Truth is that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. The Truth cannot also be that Christ is not present in the Eucharist. ** Which truth do you pick StA? You can’t have both.**

How about when a Catholic dogma is in conflict with a scientific theory?

They coexist.

**Both can be true, even though they say opposite **things.

Unless you deny the real presence, both are true: (1) Christ is really present in the sacrament, and (2) chemical analysis of the eucharistic elements would show them to be bread and wine.

It’s true that pigs can’t fly. But that, although true, is also not the opposite of “Christ is truly present in the Eucharist”. The opposite of Christ is present, is that Christ is not present.

You can’t have both. Sorry

 

[StAnastasia]

It’s true that pigs can’t fly. But that, although true, is also not the opposite of “Christ is truly present in the Eucharist”. The opposite of Christ is present, is that Christ is not present. You can’t have both. Sorry

Exactly!