Prove Transubtantiation and I will convert

  • Thread starter Thread starter guanophore
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Christ died once on the cross in payment for the sin of the world.
This is true. :yup:
Bible Believer:
In the mass, when he is viewed literally in the wafer and the wine as being literally there…
He is SUBSTANTIALLY there. There is a difference between litaral and substantial.

Jesus knows that we are human and have a need for “touch” so He humbled Himself so that we can touch Him in a substantial way. He became our “daily bread” so that we can be nourished with His Flesh & Blood which are real food and real drink. When Catholics partake in His Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity we are given Sanctifying Grace. He also became our Holy Bread from Heaven because He wanted to remain always with us in a substantial way.

We Catholics can be with Jesus during Adoration. This is a very special time spent with Jesus in prayer or we can just sit and Let God be God. We can just sit in silence so that we can HEAR what He has to say to us. I thank God for Jesus in the Holy Eucharist! 🙂
Bible Believer:
its like he is having to be sacrificed again and again.
We Catholics do not sacrifice Him again and again. We know that Jesus died once for all just like it says in Sacred Scripture. 👍 What happens in the Mass is that the Once for All Sacrifice is made present for us so that we can participate in that once for all sacrifice and unite our own sacrifices & sufferings with those of the sufferings and sacrifice of Jesus Christ. :crossrc: The Mass is the truest form of Worship in every sense of the word. I myself do not understand how anyone can sit and listen to a sermon alone and call that “Worship” without the Sacrifice of Christ.
Bible Believer:
I will say this repeatedly…I am not a catholic basher…I have MANY dear and precious friends of that religious institution

emphasis mine
I see you have no respect for your “dear and precious friends.” The Catholic Church is not a religious institution the way that you want to call her. The Catholic Church is the Body of Christ. Jesus is the Head and we are the members of His Body. The Catholic Church is the Bride of Christ. She is also our Holy Mother on Earth. We have a Mother in Heaven who is Mary but here on Earth we call the Church “Holy Mother Church” and she is guided and protected by the Holy Spirit when it comes to teaching of Faith & Morals.
Bible Believer:
…but please…the mass is not Biblical…neither is transubstantiation.
Have you ever been to a Catholic Mass before? If so, have you ever read the book of Revelations after you’ve attended a Mass? Please read Revelations and also 1 Corinthians 11:23-26;

23 For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to
you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was
betrayed took bread,
24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said,
“This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance
of me.”
25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper,
saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood.
Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup,
you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

That is part of what happens at Mass.

Here is something else Paul said to the Corinthians;
15 I speak as to sensible people; judge for
yourselves what I say.
16 The cup of blessing that we bless,
is it not a participation in the blood of Christ?
The bread that we break, is it not a participation
in the body of Christ?
17 Because there is one bread, we who are
many are one body, for we all partake
of the one bread.

That is the result of Transubstantiation.
Paul did not say, “… is it not a participation in the ‘symbol’ of the body & blood of Christ…”

Please watch & listen to the following videos;

The Mystery of the Catholic Mass

The Catholic Mass - Origins

The Catholic Mass…Revealed!
 
…continued
Bible Believer:
I know that in days past…you were damned basically if you did not believe that…according to the Canon laws, which states…If any one shall deny that the body and blood, together, with the sould and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ are truly, really and substantially contained in the sacrament of the most holy eucharist, and shall say that He is only in it as a sign, or in a figure, let him be accursed. I will state that I quoted this from a book by Jack Chick. Ok…I know…he is not popular among the Catholic institution…but he truly is trying to state Biblical truth.I know my post probably isnt popular…but please, I do not mean to be ugly or disrespectful…just sharing what I know.
If a Catholic does not believe in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ then he/she should not receive Jesus in Holy Communion. Otherwise he/she will be guilty of sinning against the Body & Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. But we still want to love that person and we pray for that person just as I pray for you.
 
Mannyfit and Rolltide did just what Steadfast was asking in the first few posts after the OP.
No, they didn’t. The texts they cited said absolutely nothing about the bread being transformed so that what remained was not bread. You see it there because you assume it will be there. Look again. Cite me the specific wording that says this. It’s not there.

Edwin
 
Guanophore’s Catholic, and a danged good one at that. He quoted Steadfast, whose church (SDA) teaches virulent anti-Catholicism which they learned from their prophetess Ellen Gould White.
I believe Steadfast is a Lutheran.

Edwin
 
Christ died once on the cross in payment for the sin of the world. In the mass, when he is viewed literally in the wafer and the wine as being literally there…
Define literally. St. Thomas Aquinas says that Christ is not there as in a place. Is that literal? Admittedly, many on this forum have a more simplistic view.
its like he is having to be sacrificed again and again.
That may be the idea that the Catholic teaching suggests to your prejudiced and poorly informed mind, but that’s your problem. That is not what Catholics or any other Christians believe. Take the trouble to inform yourself.
I will say this repeatedly…I am not a catholic basher…
Saying it doesn’t make it true.
I have MANY dear and precious friends of that religious institution.
That’s the oldest excuse of the bigot. “I can’t be a racist–I have black friends!” Come on–how dumb do you think we are to fall for that line?
.but please…the mass is not Biblical…
Define “mass.” The Mass is the Eucharist, the Lord’s Supper. We may believe different things about it, but it’s still the same divine mystery as far as I’m concerned. The Roman Catholics get a bit too literal, arguably, and you go much further off track in the other direction. But we’re all eating bread (or something resembling it) and drinking wine (of some sort) in remembrance of Christ. So as I see it, Christ is there whether you recognize Him or not.
neither is transubstantiation.
I think one can argue that transubstantiation is not necessary as a definition of the Real Presence. But I don’t think it contradicts Scripture.
I know that in days past…you were damned basically if you did not believe that…according to the Canon laws, which states…If any one shall deny that the body and blood, together, with the sould and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ are truly, really and substantially contained in the sacrament of the most holy eucharist, and shall say that He is only in it as a sign, or in a figure, let him be accursed.
Traditionally it would be assumed that someone who willfully denied this would go to hell, yes. Catholics today have redefined the “willfully” part–they no longer believe that most Protestants are willful in their denial, and I’m talking about the fairly conservative Catholics you’ll find on this board. More liberal Catholics would of course be far more open.
I will state that I quoted this from a book by Jack Chick. Ok…I know…he is not popular among the Catholic institution…
He’s not popular among any group of people who value truth and justice.
but he truly is trying to state Biblical truth.
He may be trying, but he’s failing miserably!
I know my post probably isnt popular…but please, I do not mean to be ugly or disrespectful…just sharing what I know.
Why are you concerned about being popular? Why not care about the truth? What you know is clearly not much. So learn.

Edwin
 
Originally Posted by **Bible Believer **
…but please…the mass is not Biblical…neither is transubstantiation.

**WOW! Have YOU been taught a lie! **
 
. Take the trouble to inform yourself.
He may be trying, but he’s failing miserably!
What you know is clearly not much. So learn.

Edwin

If someone knows truth the reason for the desire to share it is the good of the other. We want others to be blessed. If that is the objective we are willing to suffer some abuse or disrespect from those who are ignorant, immitating our Lord. Patience with the ignorant might help. Being abrupt and impatient will probably not lead to conversion. It makes no gain.
 
AlegreFe;3059421:
Mannyfit and Rolltide did just what Steadfast was asking in the first few posts after the OP.
No, they didn’t. The texts they cited said absolutely nothing about the bread being transformed so that what remained was not bread. You see it there because you assume it will be there. Look again. Cite me the specific wording that says this. It’s not there.

Edwin
Are you sure you read everything they posted? You missed at least one;
ST. JUSTIN MARTYR

“This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.”

" First Apology", Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155.
It is NOT bread or drink but Jesus Christ. The common bread & common drink have been transformed by “word of prayer” which comes from God. How much more clear do you want it? If they do not receive bread or drink but instead receive Jesus then it is obvious that it is no longer common bread or common drink (wine), it is now Jesus Christ.

If Steadfast does not want to see that then it is just another excuse not to believe. And I can’t believe that you are making excuses for him. It is clear as the nose on your face, right there in full color.

Again I strongly state that it is the Spirit that will grace him to believe. His own human understanding profits nothing.
64 It is the spirit that quickeneth:
the flesh profiteth nothing.
The words that I have spoken to you,
are spirit and life.
65 But there are some of you
that believe not.
John 6:64-65 Douay-Rheims (John 6:63-64)
 
If Jesus wanted people to have a clear message, he would have used clear speech, but look at the parables. I can say here to you forumers " OK guys 'n Gals, your all equal in Gods sight and even if you reject him, if you sign back up to the Club , he’s happy"
Jesus instead of saying this told a parable.The prodigal son. A obscure story where the listener was supposed to figure out the thinly veiled moral for themselves and then get bigged up about it because they managed to work out something that wasnt really rocket science in the first place.
Repentance is not simply like signing “back up to the Club”. If Jesus simply said, “OK guys 'n Gals, your all equal in God’s sight and even if you reject him, if you sign back up to the Club, he’s happy”, that obviously would not convey even an iota of repentance.
 
I am in agreement with Grandfather about patience. Our Lord and our faith do not need defended. Defense occurs when there is a threat. There is no threat to our faith. If we act like there is a threat then we in that moment separate ourselves from Christ within us. Christ stopped Peter from doing more harm with the sword. The money changers were permitted to be in the place of worship which was controlled by the officials who were not doing their job. Anger is one of the deadly sins that separates us from one another. Jesus in the Eucharist is the love that brings us together. I think frustration occurs on the human level which is the flesh because it is we who are not being understood when we present our truth. That is the beginning of sin. When we receive Our Lord in Communion it creates union and not separation. It is no longer “I who live” but “Christ in me”. It then becomes very clear that God’s word can only be spread through the luminous light that He is. Lucifer is the combustible light created by friction. If I feel the friction of hostility in me no matter how small I open up to the influence of sin that separates us and close to Christ in me even if I am expressing His Truth. In the Eucharist if I believe I receive Him then I hope I do not forget Him in me when I feel threatened or frustrated by someone’s attack or lack of belief.
 
The money changers were permitted to be in the place of worship which was controlled by the officials who were not doing their job. Anger is one of the deadly sins that separates us from one another.
"And they came to Jerusalem. And he entered the temple, and began to cast out those who were selling and buying in the temple; and he overturned the tables of the money-changes and the seats of those who sold doves. He would not allow anyone to carry a vessel through the temple. And he began to teach, saying to them, "*Is it not written, * My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations? But you have made it a den of thieves." (Mark 11:15-17)

I don’t think Jesus was not angry at that time. But hatred against another person? That is a big NO.
 
I am in agreement with Grandfather about patience. Our Lord and our faith do not need defended. Defense occurs when there is a threat. There is no threat to our faith. .
Well we know that truth shall prevail. That does not mean we do not have to help it prevail. Defending truth is a good thing, but it is a matter of how we do it if we hope to win souls. We can win intellectual arguments, but not convince anyone to join us. If we attack people personally, call them dumb, even when they are dumb, we drive them away. When we see the ignorant posing as wise it is frustrating. Many more people are converted by the witness of love than the witness of argument. Patience and kindness works, and patience needs to be exercised when we get frustrated. The virtue of patience is not one that normally comes by being infused in the soul. It has to be practiced. If Jesus were not patient with me, I would have been incinerated long ago.
 
Matthew 5:22 “But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment…if you brig your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift.” John Paul II talked about the Communion of Saints and how one who rises above their human weakness raises up the whole church. He also discussed the how the smallest most hidden and personal sin harms the church and the world. Christ wants us connected in love. Anger or frustration is the human response that harms. Our dissention with one another connects us in defensiveness no matter how small that frustration may feel. We are to proclaim the truth, not defend it. If you notice a baby in response to the slightest distress in mother becomes afraid. Beneath our adult defenses we are still that vulnerable creation. We must become open like children but with Christ in our hearts to have the Kingdom of God in us. We are required to search for the most hidden and seemingly innocent sin and seek forgiveness before we receive Our Lord in the Eucharist. My work for the last 30 years has revealed to me through Our Lord that the smallest hint of frustration exhibited through words, tone of voice, facial expression, or body posture takes us immediately to the point in our lives where we first lost love and went into hiding to defend ourselves against the pain of that lost love. Christ on the Cross is His message to us on how to express our faith and his truth. He was angry with no one. “Forgive them for they know not what they do.” He openly expressed His pain and not the response of anger which is the defense against pain. I feel pain when the beauty of the Eucharist is not seen by those in and outside our faith. I see my anger come up and I have to turn it into prayer immediately.
 
I believe Steadfast is confused. His sig says he’s Lutheran and his profile says he’s a moderate Catholic.
I believe you are confused–or rather ignorant of what Lutherans believe.

Edwin
 
Are you sure you read everything they posted? You missed at least one;It is NOT bread or drink but Jesus Christ.
That is not what the text says. I didn’t miss it. You missed the word “common.” I think Steadfast would happily agree with the claim that the Eucharist is no longer “common bread and drink.” You are completely changing what St. Justin said by missing out this word. If I say “I’m not going to wear my ordinary [common] clothes to the party,” it doesn’t mean I’m going naked! (At least it wouldn’t if I said it!:D) This is what I mean by the way your own theological presuppositions blind you to the nuances of the language you are citing.

The same is true with the word “transformation.” St. Justin says that our flesh and blood are “nourished by transformation from” the consecrated elements. He is not talking about the transformation of bread and wine into the Body and Blood, but about the transformation of the bread and wine into us, or more likely (given the way later Fathers speak) of our transformation into the Body and Blood that we receive. Either way, this is perfectly compatible with the Lutheran view of the Eucharist. You are reading hastily and are seeing things that are not there–just because the word “transformation” occurs you jump to the conclusion that it’s talking about transubstantiation, when it clearly isn’t. (This is much like the way Protestants often read 1 Peter 3:21 as saying that baptism is a symbol, when it actually says that baptism is the thing symbolized; or Romans 3:3-5 as saying that Christ’s righteousness was imputed to Abraham, when it actually says that Abraham’s faith was imputed to him as righteousness.)

There is no indication in this text or any ante-Nicene text that the bread and wine need to be metaphysically transformed in order to become the Body and Blood. This may be true–it may be the correct way to interpret the early Fathers and the New Testament, just as we believe that the un-Biblical “homoousios” is the correct way to interpret what the NT and the early Fathers say about the relationship of the Son to the Father. But it does you no good to claim that the teaching is explicitly there, when anyone looking at the text without your particular doctrinal lens will not see it. It’s not going to convince.
And I can’t believe that you are making excuses for him. It is clear as the nose on your face, right there in full color.
Clear to you. Not to him, and not to me. And your muddled reading of the text doesn’t give us a lot of confidence that the Spirit is guiding you. Does the Spirit guide people to ignore and misuse words?
Again I strongly state that it is the Spirit that will grace him to believe. His own human understanding profits nothing.
You are free to believe that, but it’s both rude and unwise to say so on a discussion forum. It amounts to an admission of defeat, in the sense that you can’t make your case by rational argument and must fall back on accusing us of spiritual blindness.

Edwin
 
I have a question. When Christ breathed on His apostles after His resurrection did and told them that all power in heaven and on earth has been given to them does that mean they were changed in order to perform the sacraments that Christ established. And if so did He also give them the power pass these powers through the sacrament of the priesthood? Does Him breathing on them create something just as significant or even more significant than God breathing life into Adam?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top