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

[Matariel]

Show me one time where Jesus’s body, in human form, was at more than one place at a time…all the examples you gave below only prove my point.

Oh, so you think Christ is not omnipotent? He can be physically present in as many places as He wants-- He’s God incarnate.

Some of our saints God blessed and they experienced bilocation.

Like the crowd that went away in disbelief, you do the same.

This is funny coming from you, since you’re the one walking away in disbelief (“What, Jesus commands us to eat Him? Nah, He can’t possibly be talking about literally eating Him!” )

You have as yet to refute the fact that trogo, the Greek word used for eat in John 6 is never used in a symbolic way anywhere in the Bible or in Greek secular literature of that time. That alone should make you rethink what you’ve been taught.

And the fact that, “to eat one’s flesh and drink one’s blood” in Jewish culture, if taked non-literally, and taken metaphorically (like you suggest) it means to slander and culminate against. If He was speaking metaphorically as you say, Jesus is saying “Unless you slander and culminate against Me, you have no life in you.”

And we all know that’s nonsensical, so odviously the Catholic position on this is correct.

The repetition you refer to is throughout Scripture because John 6 is the salvation message.

Why do you just make claims about Scripture without even showing any evidence to support your claim?

Literal eating of Jesus is not. Only in the minds of the “many”.

If Christ knew the majority of people would interpret it that way, why’d He say it? Wouldn’t He want to ensure that they understood exactly what they meant? He did! He used words and language to ensure that they understood-- that He was speaking of mystically partaking of Him (afterall, in the OT the sacrafice was always consumed afterwards, and was not considered complete until it had been eaten)-- and that’s why they walked away, just as the majority of Protestants since their beginning in the 1500’s have walked away. :nope:

 

[tqualey]

Hi, NonCatholic,

Let’s see now…

Show me one time where Jesus’s body, in human form, was at more than one place at a time.

John 6 has three logical sections: 1) Multiplication of loaves, 2) Jesus walking on water and 3) Eucharistic Discourse. In presenting these to you, I identified that Jesus went beyond human ability. He acted in a super-natural manner. The basic concept here is: Jesus is not bound by anything that we can limit Him with. He is God.

Remember, less then 24-hours had passed from the multiplication of loaves that fed 5,000+ people supper to the Jews showing up (looking for breakfast?) challenging Jesus for making them hunt for their next meal. Your question has a distinctive ring to it. Try John 6:30 "So they said to him, “What sign can you do, that we may see and believe in you? What can you do?” And, just what is it you are asking? “Show me one time…” Sounds to me like you want another ‘sign’ - Christ’s own words just are not good enough

If you have not guessed it by now, let me be the first to clue you in: there is no specific sign designed by you that Christ will respond with. But, His work is not quite finished - so, the next sign will be His Second Coming Prior to that, look to the actions he took that are beyond human capability (John 6 is already available to you - but, there are many other places in the Gospel) and then please tell me why you are demanding still another sign.

As I appreciate the dialogue in John 6, Jesus did not cut these Jewish challengers any slack - he verbally slams them right back calling them ‘freeloaders’. Why? They had no faith and were just playing games with Him. Watch where you step - in my opinion you seem to be into games.

For about 1,500 years Christ’s words, as first kept by the CC, identified in the Canon and then published in the common (Vulgate - vulgar- common) language of the time for all to read who could read or listen to someone else read. Where do you think the Holy Spirit was during this time - Christ’s promise was that the Holy Spirit would keep the CC from error and the Gates of Hell would not prevail.

.all the examples you gave below only prove my point.

As I understand your ‘point’ you are asking for another ‘sign’ - and, it is not going to happen. You have proven nothing. The point of a discussion is to work with the information available, develop a logical and consistent argument and make a clear case. No one had ever raised themselves from the Dead before - and just like the ‘directions’ or ‘instructions’ before you get to the package, Christ pointed out (in the manner He chose) He would do this. Now, no one walked away from Christ when He told them about the Sign of Jonah that would prove Him God (Luke 11:29). Why? Because Christ was not demanding anything from them like He did in the Eucharistic Discourse.

Like the crowd that went away in disbelief, you do the same. The repetition you refer to is throughout Scripture because John 6 is the salvation message. Literal eating of Jesus is not. Only in the minds of the “many”.

I think you have us confused. I have not left. I believe the words Christ spoke. The repetition is “Eat My Flesh, Drink My Blood” over and over. Yes, this is part of the Salvation Message - but, not all of it. Remember St. Paul was familiar with folk that did just that - but did it disgracefully - and are bringing judgment on themselves (1Cor 11:27). From what I have read of your posts, it appears that merely saying, “Lord, Lord…” is going answer your needs. I don’t think so.(Matt 7:21-23).

Finally, this is NOT a numbers game. This little poll is neither scientific, valid or reliable (no offense to the folks who put it up). It is, as I appreciate it, just a convenience for those interested. I didn’t cast a vote (didn’t see how to do it, to be honest - but, as you probably guessed, I do believe in the Real Presence).

I have really said all I can say to you. I have tried my best to give you Scriptural evidence (the only source you will accept) logic and way to validate what was said. The rest is really up to you.

We will each face our own Judgment Day where we will be evaluated on what we have done. This is something of true concern for all. All games are over at that point.

God bless

 

[Realcatholicgk]

tqualey;4727239:

I choose not to distort the words of Jesus as you and others continue to do. You all just keep cannibalizing my Savior; it brings great sorrow to my heart.

**
Hi Non,

You misspoke buddy! What you mean to say is you choose not to believe the words of Jesus.
I understand! The Devil clouds your mind with lies. You are in my prayers! Please do not give up hope, you can still obtain eternal life! Prayers can do wonders. Even the Devil can not prevail against the truth!

When Catholics partake in the Eucharist we show our participation in the body of Christ. We go back to the last supper with Jesis and His diciples, His life becomes our life and we become united to each other through Him and His sacrafice. Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread of life a participation in the Body of Christ?

Lets get away from John for awhile. We are all getting tired of repeating the truth over and over and you distorting it. Lets try some other Gospels for a change. Read the below verses.

“Is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.” 1 Corinthians 10:16-17

" While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.” Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” Matthew 26:26-28

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take it; this is my body.” Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it. “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.” Mark 14:22-24

And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.” Luke 22:19-20

Through Transubstantiation the bread and the wine become the actual body and blood of Christ. Of course, the bread and the wine are unchanged elements, but Christ’s physical being is present as He said it would be, This Faith is required for salvation. Jesus told us that. Jesus doesn’t lie. How you think Jesus can’t be in more than one place when He says he can and how you attempt to limit His powers just goes to reinforce the belief that satan controls your thoughts.

God Bless **

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

…Continued page 2 of 2

NonCatholic’s statement:

Continuation from John 6: 43

This is the entire 6th Chapter. The entire context includes this presentation ending with John 6: 71 and the actual delivery of the Promise as contained in the Last Supper Discourse where Matthew, Mark and Luke all record Christ’s words: “Take and eat THIS IS MY BODY” Remember Jesus has not risen from the dead - yet He is holding HIS BODY in HIS HANDS and giving it to His Apostles with very specific instructions.

No where else in the recorded Gospels does Jesus repeat Himself. Not only does He repeat Himself, He emphasizes and then re-emphasizes the fact that is presented in John 6: 53-59.

Christ draws a very clear and permanent line: you either stand with Christ and what He said - or - you walk away. Note, it is not recorded that anyone walked away from Christ because He compared Himself to a door, a vine, a sower, the son of a vineyard owner, a shepherd, etc. The Eucharistic Discourse is totally different. He was not trying to make anything sound good or pleasant - He went to great lengths to tell it like it is.

Each of us has a choice - believe in the words of Christ and that He is God and has Power over nature (as He demonstrated in the first two parts of John 6) or refuse to believe. It is really that cut and dry - because that is the way Christ presented this material to his listeners. Most walked. Note: Christ did not go running after them, saying something like, “Hold on, you guys misunderstood me.”

To present John 6 as a comedy, a misunderstanding, a farce or a fraud is wrong. Forget that the Jews were insturcted on the Passover Lamb: selection, killing, preparation - and - they ate it. Christ is the Lamb of God as announced by both Johns: John the Baptist upon seeing Christ at the Jordan River and John the Apostle in Revelation.

To present John 6: 63 (“The spirit gives life…”) as one statement to turn over the previous 8 statements about the Christ giving us His Flesh and Blood to eat and drink - is truly to lose the context of the statement. Christ is telling His listeners that they must elevate their thoughts and stop complaining that Christ is not doing things the way they want (like getting rid of Roman troops occupying Judea).

If you choose to not believe, that is your business - I and the others have chosen to believe and these are choices (among others) we will all have to answer for at our judgment.

God bless

Hello is it that you beleive Christ is there in the Spirit? For if that is what you are saying I can see what you mean,but not his actual blood and body but his Spirit? Nancy

He did say" For as much as you do this, you do in remembrance of me."

 

[NDfan]

NonCatholic;4727547:

**
Hi Non,

“Is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.” 1 Corinthians 10:16-17**

Realcatholic sorry to interrupt by how do you explain Paul still calling the bread one loaf? Paul is figuratively comparing Jesus to one loaf of bread stating that we eat from the same loaf. Paul does not call the loaf the actual flesh of Jesus.

" While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.” Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” Matthew 26:26-28

Why do you forget to quote verse 29 which is part of this?

29 I tell you I will not drink again of this **fruit of the vine **until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

Now according to you the wine literally becomes Jesus blood after the consecration. Yet here after the consecration we see Jesus still calling the liquid in the cup “fruit of the vine” which is not grape juice but a typical way of referring to wine. So instead of Jesus saying “I will not drink again this blood with you”, HE says HE will not drink again this wine. Why do you insist that it’s blood when Jesus HIMSELF calls it wine?

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take it; this is my body.” Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it. “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.” Mark 14:22-24

And again you forgot to quote verse 25:

25 Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the** fruit of the vine **until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”

So again Jesus still calls it wine even after the supposed consecration.

And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.” Luke 22:19-20

And here Jesus is telling us that the covenant is in HIS blood. HE doesn’t say this cup of my blood. The new covenant is in HIS blood instead of the blood of the lambs from the passover.

Point of fact if you carefully study the Jewish passover you will find that the Jews take 4 cups of wine during their meal. The 3rd cup which is called the cup of redemption is red wine mixed with warm water to SYMBOLIZE the blood of the lambs slain prior to the exodus. Jesus uses this very cup to show that redemption is now through HIS blood. Given the Apostles were Jewish they fully understood what HE was doing here and what HE meant and it certainly wasn’t transubstantiation.

Through Transubstantiation the bread and the wine become the actual body and blood of Christ. Of course, the bread and the wine are unchanged elements, but Christ’s physical being is present as He said it would be, This Faith is required for salvation. Jesus told us that. Jesus doesn’t lie. How you think Jesus can’t be in more than one place when He says he can and how you attempt to limit His powers just goes to reinforce the belief that satan controls your thoughts.

Well to clarify the teaching the RC claims that the substance is changed to Christ’s physical flesh and blood. But that the accidents which is the part that we see, feel touch, taste etc. are unchanged. That’s why it tastes, smells, feels, looks, and sounds like bread. This is where Aristotelian philosophy comes into play. Aristotle would describe a chair as having a substance and accidents. The substance is the elements of the metal and the fabric you can’t see. The accidents are those outward components you can observe with your senses.

Many scholars within the RCC claim that transubstantiation cannot be gleaned from the texts of scripture and no where in the history of the church do we ever see any ECFs using John 6 to describe communion. Augustine believed in the real presence as I and many others do but in his commentary on John 6 he flat out stated Jesus was speaking figuratively. As Augustine rightly points out, if Christ spoke in a manner suggestive of a crime HE must be speaking figuratively. Further claiming that Christ would never ask Jews to partake in cannibalism. To quote Augustine, “why sharpen your teeth?, if you believe you have already eaten”

To quote Christ, “whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst”.

The only way transubstantiation can be supported is by doing some major gymnastics with scripture.

PEACE

 

[Bill_Pick]

for non-cathloic–It is to be noted that some Protestant Bibles use the word “Verily”, instead of “Amen”, Verily means, “in truth”, or “with confidence”. However, in the Greek text the word used is Amen. Not only do we have the double “amen” for solemn emphasis in this verse, but we also have the keyword “unless”.
Have you ever noticed that when Jesus used the word “unless”, it was accompanied by a dire warning that His word must be obeyed, “Or you shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven”, or similar wording?
Matthew 5:20, “…Unless your justice exceeds that of the Scribes and the Pharisees…”
Matthew 18:3, “…Unless you turn and become like little children…”
Luke 13:3,5, “…Unless you repent…” (you will all perish).
John 3:3, “…Unless a man be born again…”
John 3:5, “…Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit…”
John 6:53, "…Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you, (implied, “no life everlasting”, as shown by the very next verse, John 6:54), “He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has life everlasting and I will raise him up on the last day”.
ARE ALL THESE VERSE JUST A SYMBOLISM

 

[ryanoneil]

Look at the results of the Poll; this is the “few” versus the “many”.

By the way; did I mention that John 6 has nothing to do with the Lords Supper; except the flesh and blood refer to the cross.

The “many” in the early Church took John 6 and the accounts of the Last Supper literally. Could you provide a single document in which the literal interpretation is opposed and only the metaphorical accepted?

Even if the writing was considered heretical at the time, I’d be interested in seeing it.

 

[benedictus2]

Conversely, we have “Popeolatry” rife within catholicism, who count their Pope as superior in authority to the Bible; which by the way you cannot separate from Jesus.

Wrong again we do not idolize the Pope. Ignorance Mr. Prot101. Ignorance.

Jesus and His Word are one and the same parcel - a complete whole. He is present in His Word - through His Word. The only thing you have to really “prove” your point about John 6 is the Pope’s say so,

Wrong again, It is CHRIST’S SAY SO. I am really beginning to have doubts of whether you have a ripped up Bible. Have you ommited Verses 51-58 from your Bible?

Now that is CHRIST TALKING. What? You can’t hear him? Or refuse to hear him. Thought so.

and under the circunstances you are forced to claim “church authority” to support your claims about Jesus being a piece of bread when the priest so decides at Mass. Protestants claim Bible authority.

No that again is Christ talking. Or is Matthew 16 not in your Bible. Or may just verse 18 has been chopped off.

Or maybe again, once you get to verse 18 you plug your ears and sing La lala lala to drown out Christ’s voice.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Nancy,

Hello is it that you beleive Christ is there in the Spirit?

As Catholics we believe that the priest takes common bread and wine and through the Power of Christ, consecrates these ordinary foods into the BODY, BLOOD, HUMAN SOUL and DIVINITY of Jesus Christ. Read John 6 for yourself.

Ask yourself two questions:

1- What was the concept that Christ was trying to teach His listners? and

2- Do you think Christ made this concept clear to his listeners?

I am interested in your answers. Remember, the answers are found in John 6.

He did say" For as much as you do this, you do in remembrance of me."

I think you are quoting Luke 22:19. May I suggest you read the verses that preceed this statement from Christ - this way we do not lose context. I think you will see that this section from Luke is telling us about the Last Supper - and, hours before He is put to death, Christ is sharing Himself with His Apostles (and later with us) in the most intimate way imaginable.

Now, match this up with John 6 - Jesus is preparing all of us for what the Eucharist really is - it is Himself. It is NOT: a memory or memorial of Him, it is NOT a way of getting fellowship over a meal, it is NOT a fantasy. If you believe God has the Power to do anything - and our work is to believe in what Jesus taught - then the task before us is clear: to have eternal life we are to follow His words - we are to Eat His Flesh as He commands us to.

Now, let me ask you a question to which I do not know your answer. Many Protestants believe in the literal meaning of the Bible. Why is it - in these sections where Christ is telling us about what He is doing for us - Protestants suddenly stop going literal? Recall, this is the group that (mostly) champions the idea that the earth was created in six 24-hour days because, “…the Bible tells me so…” as the little hymn goes.

God bless

 

[Matariel]

Conversely, we have “Popeolatry” rife within Catholicism…

Uh, wrong again. Who told you Catholics worship the Pope? Let me guess-- you made it up.

Christians are not supposed to lie. It reflects badly on Protestants when you do that.

…who count their Pope as superior in authority to the Bible;

Wrong again. The Pope and the Bible are not in competition. Why do you make stuff up? Is it because you have no leg to stand on? I bet you don’t have any evidence of where the “Pope is considered a higher authority than the Bible” in the Catholic Church.

…which by the way you cannot separate from Jesus.

Jesus is not words on a page. He is the Lamb of God, the Son of God. And guess what? The concept of the Trinity that you believe in came from the Catholic Church. So whenever you profess belief in the Trinity of God you are conceding that the Catholic Church was right in that infallible decision.

Jesus and His Word are one and the same parcel - a complete whole.

Jesus Christ is not ink and paper. Jesus is God.

He is present in His Word - through His Word.

No, he is the Word.

Ever read the first chapter of the Gospel of St. John?

 

[benedictus2]

**Non Catholic. **

Please read this so that you will know that this argument you raise for the umpteenth time is being answered for the umpteenth time.

Again, you confuse the literal flesh and blood with the spiritual food that Jesus is…if Jesus wanted you to eat His flesh and drink His blood in a literal/carnal sense, then this would be throughout Scripture as part of the salvation message.

Hey honey, where have you been hiding all this time. IT IS PART OF THE SALVATION MESSAGE. CHRIST SAID SO IN JOHN 6 VERSES 51-58. Do you sort of develop selective blindness when you get to those verses?

But John 6:63 Jesus tell us the context of His message, which is consistent with His divine nature and the salvation message of Scripture. Not only that, but Jesus has two natures, the human and divine…the human nature, which is the literal flesh and blood is not omnipresent; therefore He could not be at all those Mass’s all the time.

But for the umpteenth time. in John 6:63 he is talking about THE flesh in general not MY flesh.

When he talks about eating and drinking His flesh and blood he say MY flesh, MY blood.

As someone else has pointed out before, in verse 63, he is saying that it is not through knowledge of the flesh but knowledge given by the spirit that you will UNDERSTAND THIS.

With your interpretation of this verse, YOU ARE MAKING JESUS OUT TO BE A CONFUSED IDIOT because you in fact have him saying : "Eat MY flesh, drink MY blood so that you will have eternal life. But actually if you do, you will find it is all useless."

In John 6, the fact that He compares the carnal/manna in the wilderness to Himself the true spiritual food from Heaven… should be another clue that He is not talking literal flesh and blood. This is why He says that those that ate the manna die, but those that eat the true spiritual food from heaven will never die. Romans 8 gives a good comparison to flesh versus spirit; I think James may do the same.

Verse 63 contrasts “flesh / carnal” in general with “spirit”. IT DOES NOT IN ANY WAY SAY THAT** HIS** FLESH IS USELESS.

I would be concerned because all of you take the same stance the as the people that walked away because of unbelief; they did not believe Jesus and near the end of the message He clears away the crowd by “making it too hard to swallow” excuse the pun.

THEY WENT BECAUSE THEY KNEW HE WAS ASKING SOMETHING OF THEM THEY COULD NOT DO. THOSE WHO TRULY BELIEVED IN HIM STAYED.

That is why he said very early on in verse 29 he set that as a pre-condition to accepting the hard teaching that is to follow.

UNLESS YOU TRULY BELIEVE IN HIM (THAT IS DO WHAT HE COMMANDED ) YOU WILL NOT UNDERSTAND VERSES 51-58.

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

Uh, wrong again. Who told you Catholics worship the Pope? Let me guess-- you made it up.
If God came back today,he wouldn’t draw as much a crowd of Catholics as the Pope does Nancy
Christians are not supposed to lie. It reflects badly on Protestants when you do that.

Wrong again. The Pope and the Bible are not in competition. Why do you make stuff up? Is it because you have no leg to stand on? I bet you don’t have any evidence of where the “Pope is considered a higher authority than the Bible” in the Catholic Church.

Jesus is not words on a page. He is the Lamb of God, the Son of God. And guess what? The concept of the Trinity that you believe in came from the Catholic Church. So whenever you profess belief in the Trinity of God you are conceding that the Catholic Church was right in that infallible decision.

Jesus Christ is not ink and paper. Jesus is God.

No, he is the Word.

Ever read the first chapter of the Gospel of St. John?

 

[benedictus2]

The unbelievers didn’t get the euphemism, but the believers got it and nothing has changed in 2000 years. That’s why the believers didn’t say…hey Jesus…mind if I tap a vein and could I have your next toe nail clipping.

How many times do we have to tell you that there is no euphemism here. You obviously do not even know the meaning of the word.

Here is a definition of euphemism from Merriam -Webster :
the substitution of an agreeable or inoffensive expression for one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant ; also : the expression so substituted.

Did you get that?

Jesus is actually doing the opposite. He is using OFFENSIVE EXPRESSION. So he is not talking in euphemisms.

If he was talking in euphemisms, he will not have used phrases like EAT MY FLESH, DRINK MY BLOOD. Instead he would have said “feed on my word”, “imbibe my teaching”. But NO, He did not say that at all.

What did He say: EAT MY FLESH, DRINK MY BLOOD.

 

[benedictus2]

I believe that where two or three are gathered in his name then He is present. With or without communion. Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

AND HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT FOR A FACT?

BECAUSE HE SAID SO in Matthew 18:20. And you are right.

So how do we know that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood and that His flesh is true food indeed and His blood is true drink indeed?

BECAUSE HE SAID SO IN JOHN 6. SEVERAL VERSES IN FACT FROM 51-58. By verse count alone, you can tell that Jesus wants you to know that He is pretty serious about this teaching.

 

[benedictus2]

[sign]Hi Benedictous[/sign]So I spelt it wrong dont forget to tell me how dumb I am. In REV:1;4 there are 7 Spirits and if you read on there are 7 angels of the 7 churches there is not one Spirit God has 7 Spirits, and when I come back from shopping I’ll give you more information but you should READ the BOOK.If you deny the Word of God then you deny God and the son of God.It is your soul that you should be worried about I do love you and I pray Holy Father God will open your eyes and clean them with heavenly salve so you can see and undeerstand Later Nancy

You can call me what ever you like. You can even call me stupid, arrogant, idiot and it will not mean anything at all. (You will most probably be right as well )

Because you know what, that is all neither here nor there.

I am only interested in the sense you make with your post (with anyone’s post for that matter) and with this one you are not making any sense again.

Which of my posts are you replying to?

Right, you cannot quote my post because you do not have any rebuttal againsgt my argument.

So once more you drop irrevelevant passages from the Bible.

What? Do you think just dropping totally disjointed passages will make your case?

You really have to start learning how to think rationally.

 

[benedictus2]

Show me one time where Jesus’s body, in human form, was at more than one place at a time…all the examples you gave below only prove my point.
.

At the last Supper, He was sitting at the table with His disciples He said of the bread “Take and Eat. This is MY BODY”.

He was at the same time the human saying these words, giving them the bread and yet HE IS ALSO THE BREAD. BECAUSE HE SAID SO.

Yes the bread is not human form. But hey, the Eucharist is not human form.

Here at the last Supper, He is very clearly saying the BREAD IS **HIS **BODY.

 

[benedictus2]

I choose not to distort the words of Jesus as you and others continue to do. You all just keep cannibalizing my Savior; it brings great sorrow to my heart.

But YOU are the one DISTORTING THE WORDS OF JESUS.

He could not be any CLEARER WITH WHAT HE WAS SAYING AND WHAT DO YOU DO WITH HIS WORDS? YOU SPIN IT.

Much like the politicians do when they want to lie. They give a SPIN on the subject.

 

[benedictus2]

Look at the results of the Poll; this is the “few” versus the “many”.

By the way; did I mention that John 6 has nothing to do with the Lords Supper; except the flesh and blood refer to the cross.

YES YOU HAVE. And the others and myself have already replied to that.

Here is my post in refutation of that argument.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4711438&postcount=583

You really ought to read the replies to your post. Maybe then you will learn.

 

[benedictus2]

Hello is it that you beleive Christ is there in the Spirit? For if that is what you are saying I can see what you mean,but not his actual blood and body but his Spirit? Nancy

He did say" For as much as you do this, you do in remembrance of me."

Nancy, since you claim to love the Bible so much. Why don’t you actually start reading it.

I gave you a homework. John 6. Check out verses 51-58. Did you read that?

And how about Matthew 26? Hereit is verses 26-28

26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, **“Take and eat; this is my body.” **

27 Then he took a cup, gave thanks, 16 and gave it to them, saying, **"Drink from it, all of you, **

**28 **for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.

Did you get that last line? We must drink the blood of the new covenant.

 

[benedictus2]

Oh, so you think Christ is not omnipotent? He can be physically present in as many places as He wants-- He’s God incarnate.

That is exactly what he thinks. On a previous post He said that since Christ is now at the right hand of the Father, he can’t possibly be here on earth.

He has a very limited god. No, he can’t believe in the Real Presence. His god certainly can’t do that.