Protestant argument to Presence

  • Thread starter Thread starter blessedrosary
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

blessedrosary

Guest
Sorry to start another thread on this same topic, but i’ve heard the ONLY scriptural arguement against the presence of Christ in the Eucharist is the verse about Jesus’ words being spirit and life. To me, a Catholic, wouldn’t that prove more that the Eucharist is food for our spirit and our life in God? Of course his words about the Eucharist aren’t going to be about how tasty the bread and wine are. I am in complete confusion of how that verse disproves our Catholic belief. Please help, not that you’ll change my mind anyway.
 
Are you talking about John 6:63? The reason it seems to you, a Catholic, that this verse doesn’t disprove the Eucharist is because it doesn’t! 😃 I have also heard this verse is used as an arguement against the Eucharist and will be watching for replies on this one! Most Protestants refuse to recognize that vs 63 comes after the discourse on the Eucharist was concluded (at vs 59)

If this is the only verse used to disprove the Real Presence, then that is pretty thin.
 
40.png
blessedrosary:
Sorry to start another thread on this same topic, but i’ve heard the ONLY scriptural arguement against the presence of Christ in the Eucharist is the verse about Jesus’ words being spirit and life. To me, a Catholic, wouldn’t that prove more that the Eucharist is food for our spirit and our life in God? Of course his words about the Eucharist aren’t going to be about how tasty the bread and wine are. I am in complete confusion of how that verse disproves our Catholic belief. Please help, not that you’ll change my mind anyway.
Click to expand...
This was one of Zwingli’s stupider ideas, rooted in his Neo-Platonic approach to life. This misinterpretation of “spirit vs. flesh” as “immaterial vs. material” is the greatest curse of Protestantism.

Sorry for hijacking your thread–I respond only because I am a Protestant, but one who believes that Luther was a lot more on target than Zwingli on this issue.

Edwin
 
40.png
Contarini:
Sorry for hijacking your thread–I respond only because I am a Protestant, but one who believes that Luther was a lot more on target than Zwingli on this issue.
Click to expand...
Yes. Zwingli did a lot of damage.😦
 
40.png
blessedrosary:
Sorry to start another thread on this same topic, but i’ve heard the ONLY scriptural arguement against the presence of Christ in the Eucharist is the verse about Jesus’ words being spirit and life. To me, a Catholic, wouldn’t that prove more that the Eucharist is food for our spirit and our life in God? Of course his words about the Eucharist aren’t going to be about how tasty the bread and wine are. I am in complete confusion of how that verse disproves our Catholic belief. Please help, not that you’ll change my mind anyway.
Click to expand...
You know, whenever I hear this argument against the Eucharist it only makes me stronger in my beliefs. This type of talk is totally outrageous! What more could we ask for in a faith but to have Our Lord actually, physically hear with us. The miracles of the Eucharist are too numerous to list here.
 
40.png
blessedrosary:
Sorry to start another thread on this same topic, but i’ve heard the ONLY scriptural arguement against the presence of Christ in the Eucharist is the verse about Jesus’ words being spirit and life. To me, a Catholic, wouldn’t that prove more that the Eucharist is food for our spirit and our life in God? Of course his words about the Eucharist aren’t going to be about how tasty the bread and wine are. I am in complete confusion of how that verse disproves our Catholic belief. Please help, not that you’ll change my mind anyway.
Click to expand...
I always took that verse to mean that only through the spirit will the words of Jesus Christ make sense and you will be able to conceive of or discern the eucharist. The flesh (brain and human congnition) can never grasp or discern it.
 
did Jesus say his flesh was useless?he just told us we had to eat his flesh,now its a waste of time?it doesnt take much to understand what Jesus was refering to when the Gospel accounts of the last supper are read.he finished his message of how we were to eat his body and drink his blood.even Paul was told about the last supper.he had to straighten out the early church because they were eating it unworthily…
 
40.png
santaro75:
I always took that verse to mean that only through the spirit will the words of Jesus Christ make sense and you will be able to conceive of or discern the eucharist. The flesh (brain and human congnition) can never grasp or discern it.
Click to expand...
This is how I’ve understood it also. It is really by grace that one accepts the truth of the Eucharist. It is either crystal clear, or it is not. And even if it is not…you can always rely on the early church fathers to settle the disputes once and for all.
 
the early church fathers are the best place to start with…it was from the Aposties that they got their teaching…not the bible…it wouldnt be around for another 300 years…they got it first hand from the mouth of the chosen of Jesus Christ…
 
When I responded to Bill Jackson of Infamy via email, he said:
“Did Melchisadek’s Order transubstantiate the bread and wine?”
Click to expand...
Besides verse 63 that was he only other counter…lame…lame…lame.
 
40.png
santaro75:
I always took that verse to mean that only through the spirit will the words of Jesus Christ make sense and you will be able to conceive of or discern the eucharist. The flesh (brain and human congnition) can never grasp or discern it.
Click to expand...
👍 You are absolutely right! 👍
 
40.png
blessedrosary:
Sorry to start another thread on this same topic, but i’ve heard the ONLY scriptural arguement against the presence of Christ in the Eucharist is the verse about Jesus’ words being spirit and life. To me, a Catholic, wouldn’t that prove more that the Eucharist is food for our spirit and our life in God? Of course his words about the Eucharist aren’t going to be about how tasty the bread and wine are. I am in complete confusion of how that verse disproves our Catholic belief. Please help, not that you’ll change my mind anyway.
Click to expand...
Well, how about “thou shalt not be a vampire or a cannibal”. All this stuff about eating the flesh and drinking the blood gives me the willies.
 
40.png
Alfie:
Well, how about “thou shalt not be a vampire or a cannibal”. All this stuff about eating the flesh and drinking the blood gives me the willies.
Click to expand...
Naw, I don’t think so… 🙂

As a Catholic, blood, guts and flesh don’t even enter my mind when I partake of the Eucharist. Christ’s presence in the Eucharist, though truly substantial as His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, is something beyond our earthly reasoning.

I just trust what the Lord says is true…ain’t that what it’s all about??
 
40.png
JoeyWarren:
When I responded to Bill Jackson of Infamy via email, he said: Besides verse 63 that was he only other counter…lame…lame…lame.
Click to expand...
Glad to have you with us in the Church.! Went to a website called Contender Ministries that talks against the Roman Rite. They even deny that Mary was the Mother of God! They deny the real presence also, totally disregarding all of the Church’s history.They got us listed as a cult. Welcome to “The Cult” brother!
 
40.png
Tonks40:
Naw, I don’t think so… 🙂

As a Catholic, blood, guts and flesh don’t even enter my mind when I partake of the Eucharist. Christ’s presence in the Eucharist, though truly substantial as His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, is something beyond our earthly reasoning.

I just trust what the Lord says is true…ain’t that what it’s all about??
Click to expand...
Well said! It was always partaking of the Creator for me. Yes, it’s all about having faith, the faith that the Roman Rite has the truth.
 
What about the scripture that says the Most High does not dwell in things made from human hands?

Acts 7:48 Howbeit the Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet," Is not His presence everywhere? As it is written in Psalms 139:7 " Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from thy presence?"

Isn’t the communion made with human hands?
 
40.png
JoshuaJ:
What about the scripture that says the Most High does not dwell in things made from human hands?

Acts 7:48 Howbeit the Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet," Is not His presence everywhere? As it is written in Psalms 139:7 " Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from thy presence?"

Isn’t the communion made with human hands?
Click to expand...
Sounds like here they are talking about physical places. Yes, communion is made (the bread and wine) by human hands but Our Lord specifically says ;“This IS my body…” You see, this here is the danger of personal interpretation of the Scriptures. People are way out of their league. I’ll leave the interpretation of Scriptures to the experts i.e. the Church. People of have studied them for hundreds of years. I am a truck driver, you wouldn’t look to me to perform brain surgery, would you?
 
40.png
JoshuaJ:
What about the scripture that says the Most High does not dwell in things made from human hands?

Acts 7:48 Howbeit the Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet," Is not His presence everywhere? As it is written in Psalms 139:7 " Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from thy presence?"

Isn’t the communion made with human hands?
Click to expand...
You are making a leap from temples to “things made with human hands”. The temple in question is Solomon’s temple. Stephen is saying that God does not dwell in the temple he dwells in heaven (Acts 7:55). This does not negate the fact that God’s Holy Spirit can go anywhere He wills.

I can’t see where this really has anything to do with the Eucharist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top