Proving Real Presence

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rafik_Gabriel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Great video! Keep doing analyzing the scriptures, you are a great apologist 👍
 
I appreciated the video!! How would you explain to a nonCatholic “you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes (1 Cor. 11:26)” means more than just recalling, preaching, teaching, or speaking about the Lord?
 
=Rafik Gabriel;9586918]Reflection - the proves from the Holy Scriptures of the Real Presence of Christ in the Most Holy Eucharist.
For those [Oldies and at times “goodies” like ME who don’t do "you-tubes " or “facebook”

the information is found in:

***Matt.26:

Mark 14:

Luke 22:

Paul 1st. Cor 11 [look at verses 23-30
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, 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.” In the same way also 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.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes*.Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.*** THIS CAN ONLY BE TRUE IF IT IS AS PROCLAIMED IS CHRIST HIMSELF…ORDINARY BREAD AND WINE CAN’T SENT ONE TO HELL!

and of course John all of Chapter 6*

There One FINDS FIVE seperate authors of the New Testament Bible articulating and PROCLAIMING God’s singular truth on the MATTER if “The Real Presence” with is expressed and quoted by John as an “eye-whitness” to CHRIST / God’s own promise and Teaching.

John 6:47-64

"Truly, truly, I [GOD] say to you, he who believes has eternal life.I am the bread of life. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh." The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; ** he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.** For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. ** He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.** [PRECISELY WHAT TAKES PLACE IN CATHOLIC HOLY COMMUNION] … [60] Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” [abandoned God!] But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? [62] Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before? [THE “ASSUMPTION OF CHRIST”] [63] It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. AND Gods response: … [64] But there are some of you that do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him”.

**WHAT CHRIST IS SAYING TO HIS UNBELIEVERS IS THAT HE HIMSELF IS THE "SPIRIT AND TRUTH "[John 4:23-24] AND THAT IT IS NOT HIS CARDINAL BODY…[the assumption of the unbelieving defectors]. SEE John 6: 42-47 above] RATHER IT IS NOW HIS SOON TO BE RAISED; GLORIFIED AND RISEN BODY…time does NOT exist for God everything is “present time” … AND THAT EVEN HIS MORTAL -CARDINAL BODY IS OF NO SPIRITUAL PROFIT…but that is not what He Christ is proclaiming…

Either we believe Christ is GOD; PERFECT and unable to lie are we join the “unbelievers” who abandoned God. GOD JUDGES OUR ACTIONS OVER OUR WORDS!**

SO WHO IS TO BE BELIEVED? CHRIST AND FIVE NT BIBLE AUTHORS OR WHAT
PROTESTANTS DESIRE TO PROCLAIM DUE TO LACK OF REAL FAITH AND RIGHT UNDERSTANDING.

God Bless,
Pat/PJM
 
A question if I may, based on the title of this thread. Who is this proving to? The believer already believes and the non-believer doesn’t find bible quotes of any substance.
 
Non-believers find Bible quotes of great substance 🙂

So when you eat the bread and drink the blood, Jesus “abides in you and you abide in Him”

Is this “abiding” a spiritual or a physical abiding?

Kam
 
Can you share with me your religion and why you are not catholic?
 
This begs the question of why Jesus would refer to the “blood” he just gave to his apostles as the fruit of the vine.

Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine****], until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

Mark 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. 25 Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.
 
How do Protestant’s see PJM’s explanation of John 6 tie-in to your Mark and Matthew scriptural references?
 
How do Protestant’s see PJM’s explanation of John 6 tie-in to your Mark and Matthew scriptural references?
I am familiar with John 6, and have been for along time. If you look before Jesus talks about His body being bread of life you will see that Jesus is chastising disciples for following him because they got free food.
John 6:26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
Jesus saying that we must eat His flesh and drink his blood means that Jesus must be part of us in order to be saved. He said what He did to turn away the half-hearted believers, those who stayed and had an ear to hear eventually learned what He meant.
If His followers had to eat His flesh and drink His blood why didn’t Jesus offer it to them right there? Why would He tell people they must break the Law of Moses by eating flesh and drinking blood? If this was His literal intent, why didn’t He give the apostles actual flesh and blood at the last supper? If the wine actually becomes blood, why were Gentiles instructed to abstain from blood in Acts 15?
The broken bread represents how Jesus body was broken for us, and the wine the shed blood that covers our sins. Jesus only left us two rituals (for lack of a better word) to practice, communion and baptism. One symbolizes His death, the other His burial and resurrection. As we are not really buried and resurrected in baptism, so there is no flesh and blood in communion.
 
IIf His followers had to eat His flesh and drink His blood why didn’t Jesus offer it to them right there? Why would He tell people they must break the Law of Moses by eating flesh and drinking blood? If this was His literal intent, why didn’t He give the apostles actual flesh and blood at the last supper? If the wine actually becomes blood, why were Gentiles instructed to abstain from blood in Acts 15?
The broken bread represents how Jesus body was broken for us, and the wine the shed blood that covers our sins. Jesus only left us two rituals (for lack of a better word) to practice, communion and baptism. One symbolizes His death, the other His burial and resurrection. As we are not really buried and resurrected in baptism, so there is no flesh and blood in communion.
Transubstantiation is a mystery. The idea is that the bread wine become flesh and blood in substance, but still under the appearance of physical bread and wine. So Jesus did not intend the apostles to actually be eating real flesh and blood; but he was stating that this bread and wine does become his real flesh and blood for purposes of the sacrifice he was about to make. You can’t get overly scientific about it; it has to be grasped with an open mind at a deep level.
 
(1Corinthians 11:28-29) “A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the chalice. For anyone who eats and drinks without DISCERNING THE BODY OF THE LORD, eats and drinks damnation to himself”.
Dear Steve; Is S.Paul here talking about a symbol or a reality
 
I am familiar with John 6, and have been for along time. If you look before Jesus talks about His body being bread of life you will see that Jesus is chastising disciples for following him because they got free food.
John 6:26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
Jesus saying that we must eat His flesh and drink his blood means that Jesus must be part of us in order to be saved. He said what He did to turn away the half-hearted believers, those who stayed and had an ear to hear eventually learned what He meant.
If His followers had to eat His flesh and drink His blood why didn’t Jesus offer it to them right there? Why would He tell people they must break the Law of Moses by eating flesh and drinking blood? If this was His literal intent, why didn’t He give the apostles actual flesh and blood at the last supper? If the wine actually becomes blood, why were Gentiles instructed to abstain from blood in Acts 15?
The broken bread represents how Jesus body was broken for us, and the wine the shed blood that covers our sins. Jesus only left us two rituals (for lack of a better word) to practice, communion and baptism. One symbolizes His death, the other His burial and resurrection. As we are not really buried and resurrected in baptism, so there is no flesh and blood in communion.
Any who posts so many questions cannot expect a succinct answer. To understand the Catholic position, there are many apologetic texts which explain the very NECESSITY of the real presence of God in the eucharist. Asking so many questions suggests that you assume there is either no response, or an inadequate one. May I suggest that you are totally wrong.

One such text, which I’m reading now myself, is Scott Hahn’s Letter and Spirit. It deserves a careful reading. God bless you.
 
Thanks, Crumpy. I cherish my Catholicism. I ask questions to better understand other faiths. Where can you find Scott Hahn’s “Letter and Spirit?”
 
This begs the question of why Jesus would refer to the “blood” he just gave to his apostles as the fruit of the vine.

Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine****], until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

Mark 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. 25 Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

Thanks stevekehl. JESUS didn’t need to consume the covenant meal nor HIS blood.

His words were to the apostles and us … not a self actualization, though He did eat the prescribed Passover Meal before this in fulfilling the Old Law as the Son of Man , prior to this establishing of a New Covenant in His Blood (versus symbolic wine - HIS choice of words).

Wine was consumed as part of the passover meal. Still is. Jesus refused even the vinegar offered him on the cross (a bitter “fruit of the vine”). Though Jesus said this is my blood of the new and eternal covenant and told His apostles to “Drink This …” HE did not need to drink his own consecrated blood as part of a covenant as they did.

Some teachers look for loopholes (to recall a half jest of W.C. Fields when he was caught reading a Bible - contrary to his public rascal image) in Catholic Church teaching about the Eucharist. The trouble is - Christ Himself. It was HE who was at His most repetitive and insistent during His declarations captured in John Chapter 6. “Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you have no life in you …” is a corker. It is ONLY explained later in the
Last Supper narratives of the other three Gospels. It is a covenant - take it or leave it!

“Take this eat … Take this DRINK …Do THIS in memory of me … (from the lips of He who also said) I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven … What you bind on Earth will be bound in Heaven”

Jesus’ words must be kept and not made inferior to what He said and meant; ditto the teachings of His deputized Church. Not EVEN self appointed latter day teachers without Church authority changing Christ’s profound teachings into something more - modern, liberal, understandable, easily doable, or more comfortably obscure and ignorable.

**Has the Catholic Church really imagined a God who comes closer to His Children than the “REAL God”? ** Have self-styled later reformers (who scripture incidentally warns the faithful against) so enticed the “itching ears” of many that they cast aside “sound teaching” that already exists for worldly novelties?

Sound teaching of the Christ-founded Church (and its holy tradition - whether by word or in writing, scripture etc.)?

I have heard a “Protestant teaching” from a “non-denominational” Church that proposed that Jesus MEANT for us to “feed on Him in His word the Bible” when He figuratively declared His " … or else you will have no life in you …" mandate.

YET He gives His disciples a series of commands after the Last Supper telling them to DO THIS … and though scripture was read at the Passover (from a scroll as “The Bible” of that night would not have been printed, mass produced nor had a New Testament in it!) The “Do this …” involved the "breaking of the bread’.

The imagined self correction of Jesus from “Take this and Drink it, this is my blood the blood of the new and ETERNAL covenant which will be shed for you unto the forgiveness of sins …” to being merely “the fruit of the vine …” (and nothin’ much special) again … makes me imagine the*** relieved*** apostles breaking up, slappin’ one another on the back, and goin’ …

“THAAAAT JESUS! … What a kidder! THIS is not a “hard teaching” at ALL!” :ouch: phew!

For all the scolding the Catholic Church gets on the subject of “FAITH!” from its self-starter Christian “allies” or “denominations;” it’s belief in
  • the most repeated and emphasized words of Jesus,
  • reiterated by HIM at the most critical time in all of Human History,
  • to His most trusted disciples and future Church leaders,
  • some of whom wrote it down in what became New Testament scripture
– is still held firm to in the Church Jesus founded … and to which He gave His “gates of Hell shall not prevail against IT” promise to.

The Good News is - EVERYONE is invited to experience such intimacy with God!
This distant, obscure “warn-you-with-an-unless and then never-tell-you-how-to fulfill
His mandatory covenant directives”
kind of a God … isn’t Jesus.

Jesus comes even CLOSER to us than EVEN His Church knows how to teach about it.
St. Paul admits that now we see as through a glass darkly, THEN we shall see Him face to face (and understand much more).

He is a God of order, not a God of confusion. He DOES want us to SEEK Him, but He also comes knocking at our door. ALSO seeks us out when we are lost. Is ready to forgive us 70 X 70 for our trespasses if we are truly sorry, confess our wrongs, make a good firm purpose of amendment, and work with the graces He’ll give us TO repent and never sin again!

He is OUR Father. He wants US to forgive others their trespasses against US so that
even as the God of Justice He can Justly pardon us in the measure we have measured out (completely)! He is of course merciful too and boundlessly so. But wants us to ASK.

He speaks of dwelling within us too. NOT just symbolically (let alone symbolically in a never-ever-true but always obscure and distant way); but really, truly all-in-all.

Hey. I like wine as much as the next guy. But just as YOU presumably accept Jesus as your real (not just symbolic) savior, with real power to give you real salvation in a real eternal dwelling - I believe in His real presence (This is My Blood) come to us in OUR keeping of His “Do THIS” covenant.

He is everywhere most Christians agree. Yet somehow more so “in the praises of His people.” Or when we “seek Him” by learning of Him in the scriptures, or participating in true worship of Him. Or obey the authorities He has placed over us (HIS Church, not just Caesar for goodness sakes).

It CAN be hard to DEAL with the Lord. We have free will and are not so unlike the Israelites who cowered when they heard His voice and wanted Him to be more distant and have Moses act as a buffer. Or encountering His Holiness that struck Abraham with fear, and Isaiah, and St. John.

But whether He comes to us on the clouds of Heaven (as prophesied for later), a little babe in a manger (smaller than expected! and more poor); or in the most Holy Eucharist
(the breaking of the bread witnessed to at the Last Supper and miraculously at Emmaus);
we have a Lord to love.

One might argue with the faithful when given the Good News, but Jesus doesn’t always appear to people like He did with St. Thomas nor knock them from their horse and blind them (as with St. Paul) to make His point.

“Blessed are they who have not seen, yet believe!” 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top