Protestants: Do you believe that Christ is truly present in the communion elements of bread and wine?

[Protestant101]

Have you really read and pondered on the postings from tqualey, Pete, Benedictus and even mine? Have you? If you had you might have said “I must ponder…”

As I said; either He is present, or He is not. How can it get any “greater?”

I have read all those posts. Here is some of my response. More will come. I expect the name calling and personal characterizations will flow again; but I could save you all the trouble. I have a lot of them memorized now. Would you like me to just post them below for you?

 

[NonCatholic]

Christ is at the right hand of God until He comes again.

John 6:39-40 39 "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

Here Jesus explains the meaning of the text.

John 6:47-48 47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 “I am the bread of life”.

Here he explains it again, but in a more pressing manner.“Truly, truly I say to you.”

The majority or the “many” (Matt 7:13-14) did not understand because of unbelief. This is not a literal bread, flesh or blood…“do this in remembrance of me”

Ironically one of the easier texts of Scripture to comprehend, but one of the most misunderstood; just as crowd that first herd the message and did not get it; we still find this today, the “many”.
However, Jesus said it would be this way and it is. Without receiving the Holy Spirit, no one can understand the Bible, just as God said. “The natural man cannot understand the things of God”.

Christ can’t be present because He told us where He is and what He is doing. Hebrews Chapters 7,8,9 and 10 explain why the priesthood and sacrifice, which was part of the Levitical system was no longer needed because of the perfect high priest finished made the one perfect sacrifice; so the work is finished and He now sitting at the right hand of God; something a Levitical priest could never do…this is part of the ushering in of the New Covenant. It is also why God rent the temple exposing the Holy of Hollies because there was no longer a need for an altar and a sacrifice, Yet you will see “many” still doing things in a shadow of the Old Testament; kind of a hybrid of OT and something new.

Baptism of water versus the baptism by the Holy spirit is easy to distinguish from Scripture; yet “many” teach that the two are intertwined and they are necessary for salvation; however the gospel message is clear on salvation; so any interpretation that makes water baptism necessary for salvation…missed the salvation message because they are unable to discern the things of God even though it is so clearly written throughout Scripture.

This is why I believe so strongly in Scripture because it does what it says and it is observable. Again God said “the natural man cannot understand the things of God”

 

[Cinette]

No he is not present in the “experience”. Search the Bible and please give us chapter and verse where Christ says he is present in the “experience”. Whether you “experience” his prence or not, He is in the bread. You do not determine when He is present, Christ does.

Your “experience” can just easily be of the devil because he masquerades as an angel of light.

Your “experience” does not determine His presence. He is present because HE SAID SO, feelings or no feelings. You rely too much on subjective emotions.

You call yourself a Christian and yet here is Christ telling you in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS that He is indeed the Bread that you must eat to gain eternal life and yet you do not believe Him. How sad. You pick and choose which words of Christ you believe so in effect it is not Christ who is Lord of your Life, but yourself.

Our worthiness does not determine His presence. He gives himself to us as food whether we deserve Him or not. Our sins does not make Him disappear from the Bread. He is outside of us totally in control. But you would like to believe that you can control Christ’s presence. Sheer ego.

Actually you are the one who is apostate becuase you are going against Christ’s will. As I have said before, you may be sincere but painfully ignorant when it comes to the Eucharist. The sad thing is there is no need to be if you will just open your eyes and for once believe in Christ when He speaks.

Wrong again. Christ said He is the bread. Christ is Divine. If you eat Him, you partake of His Divine Nature. That is why He said those who eat Him will live forever. Only those that are divine live forever.

And sorry to say this but your little references to other passages in the Bible have not in any way shown that God’s word is His Flesh. He is clear about the word Flesh.

My sentiments exactly. Above all I felt very sad that anyone can interpret Jesus’ teaching in such a way. It is sad.

:sad_bye:

 

[Cinette]

As I said; either He is present, or He is not. How can it get any “greater?”

I have read all those posts. Here is some of my response. More will come. I expect the name calling and personal characterizations will flow again; but I could save you all the trouble. I have a lot of them memorized now. Would you like me to just post them below for you?

You are over-reacting because I have never called you names and neither has anybody on this thread.

You must remember that the Eucharist is the source and summit of our Catholic faith. People have given their lives in defence of the Eucharist, there have been many Eucharist miracles. It is awsome and something we hold up high.

As I said before you can criticize our faith but when it comes to the Eucharist…

Of course we will be offended. Of course we will be sad. What else can you expect? If you believed Jesus’ teaching in John 6 as we do you would feel like we do.

 

[benedictus2]

As I said; either He is present, or He is not. How can it get any “greater?”

And as I hae said, you are right. He is either present or He is not.

You say he is not. Christ says He is. I’d believe Christ over you anytime.

You have not responded to any of my posts. Either you have put me on your ignore list or I and the others are right and you just have no comeback.

I have read all those posts. Here is some of my response. More will come. I expect the name calling and personal characterizations will flow again; but I could save you all the trouble. I have a lot of them memorized now. Would you like me to just post them below for you?

I went to your website and and yes it is exactly what you have posted before. Thing is I have already replied to that and so have others. But you have not presented any well reasoned response to mine. I checked.

It is like you said the sky is blue. And I and others said no it is actually grey because of a.b.c. But instead of explaining why we are wrong about a.b.c. being support for the sky is grey, you just say again that the sky is blue when people have already given ample support that you are wrong because of a.b.c.

If you are going to debate, you should address the points we have raised in the same way we addressed all your points and not just keep reiterating what you have said before.

 

[NonCatholic]

**Christ is at the right hand of God until He comes again; therefore He is not present at communion in the literal sense because then, He would not be at the right hand of God.
**
John 6:39-40 39 "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

Here Jesus explains the meaning of the text.

John 6:47-48 47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 “I am the bread of life”.

Here he explains it again, but in a more pressing manner.“Truly, truly I say to you.”

The majority or the “many” (Matt 7:13-14) did not understand because of unbelief. This is not a literal bread, flesh or blood…“do this in remembrance of me”

Ironically one of the easier texts of Scripture to comprehend, but one of the most misunderstood; just as crowd that first herd the message and did not get it; we still find this today, the “many”.
However, Jesus said it would be this way and it is. Without receiving the Holy Spirit, no one can understand the Bible, just as God said. “The natural man cannot understand the things of God”.

Christ can’t be present because He told us where He is and what He is doing. Hebrews Chapters 7,8,9 and 10 explain why the priesthood and sacrifice, which was part of the Levitical system was no longer needed because of the perfect high priest finished made the one perfect sacrifice; so the work is finished and He now sitting at the right hand of God; something a Levitical priest could never do…this is part of the ushering in of the New Covenant. It is also why God rent the temple exposing the Holy of Hollies because there was no longer a need for an altar and a sacrifice, Yet you will see “many” still doing things in a shadow of the Old Testament; kind of a hybrid of OT and something new.

Baptism of water versus the baptism by the Holy spirit is easy to distinguish from Scripture; yet “many” teach that the two are intertwined and they are necessary for salvation; however the gospel message is clear on salvation; so any interpretation that makes water baptism necessary for salvation…missed the salvation message because they are unable to discern the things of God even though it is so clearly written throughout Scripture.

This is why I believe so strongly in Scripture because it does what it says and it is observable. Again God said “the natural man cannot understand the things of God”

 

[Cinette]

I protest the sacrifice of the Mass, which contradicts the biblical teaching that Jesus died once for all, a simple sacrifice for sin that is never to be repeated (Heb. 9:26-28)

Your above “signature” is highly offensive and totally wrong. We do not deny Hebrews 9:26-28 - it is part of our Faith. Your statement shows ignorance beyond belief.

:nope: :nope: :nope: :nope: :nope:

 

[benedictus2]

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cab/viewpost.gif
***Christ is at the right hand of God until He comes again; therefore He is not present at communion in the literal sense because then, He would not be at the right hand of God. ***

Aahhh yes, the protestant’s inability to understand that Christ is God and therefore can be anywhere He wants to be at the same time if He so wishes. What sort of a God do you have in your head? Obvioiusly you have a very limited God and a limited God is not God at all.

John 6:39-40 39 "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 **“For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” **

So therefore you can say goodbye to heaven because you have not BEHELD Him?

Here Jesus explains the meaning of the text.

John 6:47-48 47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 “I am the bread of life”.

Here he explains it again, but in a more pressing manner.“Truly, truly I say to you.”

*The majority or the “many” (Matt 7:13-14) did not understand because of unbelief. This is not a literal bread, flesh or blood…“do this in remembrance of me” *

Another Biblical sleight of hand. Matthew 7:13:14 has absolutely NO BEARING ON JOHN 6 AT ALL.

And you are right there, He is explaining it in a more pressing manner on verse 47-48. But wait, it gets EVEN MORE PRESSING from verse 53.
*“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 19 my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. 55 **For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. **56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. 57 **Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. **58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, **whoever eats this bread will live forever.” **

Ironically one of the easier texts of Scripture to comprehend,

And one of the most clear and yet you keep failing to comprehend

but one of the most misunderstood; just as crowd that first herd the message and did not get it; we still find this today, the “many”.

And you sir are included in the "many’ who did not get it. The support you gave for your position above is no support at all.

However, Jesus said it would be this way and it is. Without receiving the Holy Spirit, no one can understand the Bible, just as God said. “The natural man cannot understand the things of God”.

That is right. Because you are separated from the Church to whom He gave the promise of the Holy Spirit to lead her into all truth, therefore all your nterpretations are natural and completely bereft of the guidance of the Holy Spirit. You’re interpretation is that of man because you lack faith. Jesus very early on has said that you will need to believe before you can accept what He is saying. But because you do not believe and do not have the guidance of the Holy Spirit, you cannot believe.

Christ can’t be present because He told us where He is and what He is doing.

But oh yes He is becuase HE TOLD US SO. HE TOLD US REPEATEDLY AND YOU KEEP IGNORING HIM. It is like He is talking to you but you persist in sticking your fingers in your ears so you won’t hear. You ease the pressure of your fingers just enough to head only those that YOU WANT TO HEAR.

I noticed that you conveniently did not quote his discourse about his flesh. Why is that? Afraid of Christ’s own words?

 

[Cinette]

Originally Posted by NonCatholic View Post
Christ is at the right hand of God until He comes again; therefore He is not present at communion in the literal sense because then, He would not be at the right hand of God.

So Jesus, who is the 2nd person of the Trinity, can only be at one place at the same time?

Whenever two or more gather in my name there I am in their midst. So Jesus cannot be in the midst of your prayer group because he would have to leave the “right hand of the Father”

That is a good one - I will paste this in my funny book!

God created the universe and cannot be everywhere?

 

[ufamtobie]

Christ is at the right hand of God until He comes again.

John 6:39-40 39 "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

 

[benedictus2]

Baptism of water versus the baptism by the Holy spirit is easy to distinguish from Scripture; yet “many” teach that the two are intertwined and they are necessary for salvation; however the gospel message is clear on salvation; so any interpretation that makes water baptism necessary for salvation…missed the salvation message because they are unable to discern the things of God even though it is so clearly written throughout Scripture.

And I replied to this point on another thread. You actually did something that was very dishonest. You quoted scripture changing the words to support your point of view that the Word is the water of baptism that Paul speaks of. If I had not actually re-checked your quote I probably would have believed you too. Now I make it a habit to check your scriptural quotes just to be sure.

This is why I believe so strongly in Scripture because it does what it says and it is observable. Again God said “the natural man cannot understand the things of God”

If you really believe in Scripture, you will allow it to speak for itself rather than gagging it and making it say what you want it to say.

 

[pneuma07]

Again, not deceiving. Instead, providing his mistaken (and self-serving) understanding. It would be pretty uplifting for Ignatius to believe that any disobedience or disagreement with Ignatius as bishop amounts to disagreemnt and disobedience with God himself. Further, to a considerable degree the early church was the welfare system of its political/social environment. It cared for its widows and its poor. If one could not receive such welfare without being recognized as being in communion with the local church via the eucharist and if one could not participate in the Eucharist w/o submitting to the bishop, then the bishop controlled not just the path to salvation, but also the path to charity. Excommunication threatened both.
Nope. I think Ignatius tries to justify that position by reference to Christ (ie follow the bishop as Christ followed the Father), but Christ’s obedience to the Father does not establish the authority that Ignatius claims for himself as bishop.
Shouldn’t we both answer that question the same? That is, we should be inclined to believe those that have demonstrated a good moral character, but must always exercise that inclination with the realization that all men possess a sinful nature that will influence them from time to time. I would suggest that the real question is, “To what degree has the Holy Spirit guided all the generations of the church and protected each from error?” Did Ignatius and the other apostolic fathers enjoy some gift from the Holy Spirit that is not enjoyed today by both RC and non-RC theologians? I am not inclined to think that they did.
B/c, contrary to the criticism often leveled against protestants by RCs, I am inclined to think that the ECFs should be given a voice in determining a proper interpretation of scripture etc., but I am also inclined to believe that their voice should not be accorded the excessive weight awarded by the RCC. Also, I think there is a tendency for all to interpret the ECFs to align with one’s own views (no doubt you have thought that of me)…also it can be somewhat satisfying to point out (hopefully in love) that an ECF (say Augustine in sermon 272) isn’t clearly saying what RCs often declare that the ECF is saying.
Bless you my friend

Dear Radical,

human nature being what it is, Ignatius was self-serving ( his mind preoccupied with power games ) on the road to martyrdom.

You seem to believe the Holy Spirit did not protect any generation, even the first post-apostolic one. On the contrary, he specially decided to let this generation go astray.

I’m inclined to believe Christ , the Word made flesh, is the source of Christianity.

In a single paragraph you state no fewer than three times that the Catholic Church is wrong on something. (Even if one could easily word the first sentence like this or so : “**The CC is right to think the ECFs should be given a voice in …scripture, even if I do not accord as much weight as she does.”) **

Why is that so particularly attractive pointing to supposed catholic errors ?

I hope you are not studying ECFs ( or anything else) mainly in order to find errors in the Catholic Church (or anybody else).

You call those guys, probably the same guys, “Church Fathers” as we do. We consider them spiritual fathers because we acknowledge in them an important and overall positive influence within the Church of which they were first of all…children.
Is it consistent considering them your fathers, if, in your perspective, they kept deviating, even the sub-apostolic ones whom you so reasonably declared to value most in post 77 ?

If, in particular, you are plainly against episcopacy, do you see Ignatius (and those like-minded ), being so manifestly wrong ( at least ) in this central tenet of his, as a spiritual father of yours ?

Bless you

 

[benedictus2]

Hi there Non catholic,

The above Bible verse you qouted has the the word Behold"

Definition of Behold:To have in sight; to see clearly; to look at; to regard with the EYES To direct the eyes to, or fix them upon, an object; to look; to see.
V
V
V
V

Rev. 6. And I Beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne, . . . a lamb as it had been slain.

Non catholic, stop you NonSense and believe and BEHOLD:thumbsup: while you still can.

Ufam tobie

Vunderbar:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

 

[GKC]

We gave our son a 3 year subscription to the Gilbert Magazine. Does that make him or me the member of the Society?? or both??

Enjoy your reading.

Cinette

My subscription lapsed a couple of years ago. But I suspect your son’s the member.

The reading about my man is going well, about 150 pages to go. I’ll be ordering 2 new books on him today. I started reading and collecting him around 45 years ago. Chesterton isn’t my only collecting area, but he is about my favorite.

GKC

 

[Protestant101]

Originally Posted by NonCatholic View Post
So Jesus, who is the 2nd person of the Trinity, can only be at one place at the same time?

Whenever two or more gather in my name there I am in their midst. So Jesus cannot be in the midst of your prayer group because he would have to leave the “right hand of the Father”

That is a good one - I will paste this in my funny book!

God created the universe and cannot be everywhere?

While you are pasting that in your “funny book,” you should also find a place to paste what you said about Jesus being everywhere. Of course; He is or can be “everywhere;” but He is not “in everything.” Which a piece of bread would have to be counted as.

 

[Patrick_Murebil]

“His promises” are His Word. The Bible means what it says. It does not say in John 6 that we partake of His divine nature by eating Him, in any form; whereas there are Bible verses throughout the old and new testament which clearly show how God sees His Word, as our “food.”

Hi Protestant101,

So you say “His promises” are “His Word”?

And you say that there are Bible verses throughout the old and new testament which clearly show how God sees His Word as our food.

Please answer these two questions:

What is the ture Word of God, is it The Bible, or is it Jesus, The Word of God made flesh?

Are Jesus’ words in John 6 telling His disciples to eat the Bible, or does Jesus tell His disciples, by HIS WORDS (recorded in the Bible), that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood, because His flesh is true food and His blood is true drink, and no one can have eternal life without eating His flesh and drinking His blood?

God bless all!!!

 

[Protestant101]

quote=benedictus2;4695795] No he is not present in the “experience”. Search the Bible and please give us chapter and verse where Christ says he is present in the “experience”. Whether you “experience” his prence or not, He is in the bread. You do not determine when He is present, Christ does.

“Where two or three are gathered together in My name;” is a good start. When we go to Communion; we are gather together “in His name;” and so Jesus is present in the experience, according to the Bible.

Your “experience” can just easily be of the devil because he masquerades as an angel of light.

That is why we must test our experience by God’s Word.

Your “experience” does not determine His presence. He is present because HE SAID SO, feelings or no feelings. You rely too much on subjective emotions.

Correct. My experience would not determine any such thing; but my experience would be a good witness, or testimony to His presence in the experience of Communion, or in your case, Mass. Again; God’s Word would have to be the test of the experience.

You call yourself a Christian and yet here is Christ telling you in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS that He is indeed the Bread that you must eat to gain eternal life and yet you do not believe Him. How sad. You pick and choose which words of Christ you believe so in effect it is not Christ who is Lord of your Life, but yourself.

I fully believe the words of John 6, but I reject totally the Catholic interpretation thereof. Not accepting the Catholic position on this would not make me a “non-Christian.”

Our worthiness does not determine His presence. He gives himself to us as food whether we deserve Him or not. Our sins does not make Him disappear from the Bread. He is outside of us totally in control. But you would like to believe that you can control Christ’s presence. Sheer ego.

I believe that God’s will, as expressed in His Word, determines His presence, but I guess that if we are truly “gathered in His name,” some would call that a way of “controlling” or “determining” His presence. But it’s true, my “ego” has nothing to do with it. You are correct, in saying that Jesus gives Himself to us as food whether we deserve it or not, as we see in the very sad case of Judas at The Last Supper.

Actually you are the one who is apostate becuase you are going against Christ’s will. As I have said before, you may be sincere but painfully ignorant when it comes to the Eucharist. The sad thing is there is no need to be if you will just open your eyes and for once believe in Christ when He speaks.

Well, I knew before I made these posts that your church sees me as apostate, heretic, and the like. By your own church’s definitions, I don’t really feel I am qualified to be called such things, however, your church is not united on such topics anyways so I am leaning towards what the Bible says on it all.

And sorry to say this but your little references to other passages in the Bible have not in any way shown that God’s word is His Flesh. He is clear about the word Flesh.

Who is the one rejecting clear Scripture now?

 

[Cinette]

Of course; He is or can be “everywhere;” but He is not “in everything.” Which a piece of bread would have to be counted as.

I don’t think one should end a sentence with the word as - that is why your sentence doesn’t make much sense.

You probably are trying to deny the Eucharist in which case I would like to ask you - is it worthy of you to say such a thing? Is it worthy of you to show disrespect for our Faith? Is this why you are on CAF - to denigrade the Catholic Faith? Or to debate, share and learn like a civilized human being?

Have a little dignity - you are being UGLY! :slapfight:

 

[Protestant101]

Hi Protestant101,

So you say “His promises” are “His Word”?

And you say that there are Bible verses throughout the old and new testament which clearly show how God sees His Word as our food.

Please answer these two questions:

What is the ture Word of God, is it The Bible, or is it Jesus, The Word of God made flesh?

Are Jesus’ words in John 6 telling His disciples to eat the Bible, or does Jesus tell His disciples, by HIS WORDS (recorded in the Bible), that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood, because His flesh is true food and His blood is true drink, and no one can have eternal life without eating His flesh and drinking His blood?

God bless all!!!

Well; can we have eternal life if we reject His Word? Are there other ways that we can have “eternal life” besides the communion or mass services? How readest thou? (Luke 10:26)

 

[Protestant101]

I don’t think one should end a sentence with the word as - that is why your sentence doesn’t make much sense.

You probably are trying to deny the Eucharist in which case I would like to ask you - is it worthy of you to say such a thing? Is it worthy of you to show disrespect for our Faith? Is this why you are on CAF - to denigrade the Catholic Faith? Or to debate, share and learn like a civilized human being?

Have a little dignity - you are being UGLY! :slapfight:

I thought you said a couple of posts ago that no one has called me names on this thread??? :frighten:

I am here to “compare and contrast” as the forum specs tell us we can do here. I don’t think I have broken any rules, unless it is against the rules to really disagree with some of your teachings. shaw: