Real Presence Apologetics

[Gabriel_of_12]

Thank you Gabriel of 12
This was the whole point of my exercise and in my going to (uncharacteristicaly) a non biblical ( so mere human )source.

My point briefly was that the Greek word mysterium or the English translation mystery or the Latin equivilent Sacrament, can only be found in New Testament in relation to :

2Thess2:7" For the mystery of iniquity doth already work" and
1Tim3:16. “The mystery of Godliness”

Nowhere is the word mysterium or mystery, or sacrament found in connection to “the Lord’s Supper” ( I believe) in all references to it ; either in historical account or in its new testament practice.

For we who believe it is a remembrence ; and like the passover lamb,it symbolises Christs coming death anf it is not a mystery as such, but a series of actions (performed by Christ) to show the
spiritual reality of what the death of Jesus would mean for those who “believe.” (in him)
So therefore to us it is not a mystery. But is in this respect this mememorial is so much superior to the passover : the coming death pictured by a spotless lamb was as it where vailed. In type and shadow (or to a degree , a mystery)but the supper 's repetition was in substance and visable reality.

**
You are mistaken; Paul contends from his epistles that he and the apostles are the “Stewards of the Mysteries of God”. Paul also quotes that, he and the apostles have been given the ministry of reconciliation to the world.**
Context, context, context of the whole is derived from the full deposit of faith, which is Apostolic Tradition practices and Sacred Scripture who hands down these divine revelations from their apostolic successors in the Catholic Bishop’s united with the bishop’s of Rome.

What mysteries is Paul speaking of that God has made him and the apostles “stewards of God’s mysteries”?. Sacraments is the short answer.

You did not just say that the last supper is just a moment to remember, and that Jesus Last Supper is a symbol of Jesus death? We have much to discuss if this is your belief?

 

[Bernard_Lyons]

**
You are mistaken; Paul contends **from his epistles that he and the apostles are the “Stewards of the Mysteries of God”. Paul also quotes that, he and the apostles have been given the ministry of reconciliation to the world.
Context, context, context of the whole is derived from the full deposit of faith, which is Apostolic Tradition practices and Sacred Scripture who hands down these divine revelations from their apostolic successors in the Catholic Bishop’s united with the bishop’s of Rome.

What mysteries is Paul speaking of that God has made him and the apostles “stewards of God’s mysteries”?. Sacraments is the short answer.

You did not just say that the last supper is just a moment to remember, and that Jesus Last Supper is a symbol of Jesus death? We have much to discuss if this is your belief?

“Stewards of the mysteries of God”( KJV) 1Corinthians4:1.

It is my understanding that Paul here is dealing with schism caused by the “church” at Corinth ,especially in regards to there isolating one minister in particular: "everyone of you saith ,I am of Paul ; and I of Apollos "(1Cor12) and this to the detriment and unity of the whole( that is the unity of the one ministry; and of the one “Church” ) church at Corinth .
I believe therefore,in your verse (4:1) Paul seeks to unite the ministry( or ministers) “Stewards” with the united whole message that they were sent with:“the mysteries of God”.

With this all encompassing figure of speech ((4:6) is not Paul summarising the whole of that was spoken by the Gospel ministers?As stated previously in chapter 2: 7 “But we Speak the wisdom of God in a mystery,even the hidden wisdom,which God ordained before the world”

In any case where is the apostle directly referencing any particular Mystery here?
No mention is made of the Lord’s supper; or for that matter those Mysteries he elsewhere talks of individually. "The mystery of Godliness " or “The mystery of iniquity”.

The remembrance or memorial of the Lord’s supper is to us not just a moment ( as such) ,but the significance ,or meaning that the whole ( we believe) symbolised and it’s significance in application to those who in our day,share in its reality or participate in the effects following that night " in which he was betrayed".

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Bernard Lyons;11738272]“Stewards of the mysteries of God”( KJV) 1Corinthians4:1.

It is my understanding that Paul here is dealing with schism caused by the “church” at Corinth ,especially in regards to there isolating one minister in particular: "everyone of you saith ,I am of Paul ; and I of Apollos "(1Cor12) and this to the detriment and unity of the whole( that is the unity of the one ministry; and of the one “Church” ) church at Corinth .
I believe therefore,in your verse (4:1) Paul seeks to unite the ministry( or ministers) “Stewards” with the united whole message that they were sent with:“the mysteries of God”.

No,no, no. There is no schism caused by the Church here. Schism implies a lack of full communion between Peter and Paul, which does not exist. An Apostle could never be in schism with his own community as you are wrongly implying.

Paul teaches the Corinth community to regard both Peter and Paul and all apostles as servants (in the priesthood of Christ) of Christ and Stewards (overseer’s) of the mysteries of God". The “Stewards” (overseer’s = bishop’s) have to be found trustworthy in order to be. Further more Paul is teaching it is not for believers to judge the ministers, God is the judge.

The point is made that the Mysteries of God is quoted from scripture translated from Mysterium and Sacrament = mysteries of God as it has always been. Taking all of the whole, the wisdom, the baptism, the Eucharist, Confirmation of the Holy Spirit, priesthood of Christ are all conducted by the Stewards of these mysteries of God. Because God’s presence is made known sacramentally by the Holy Spirit in them.

God does not speak figuratively or symbolically when it comes to His Mysteries revealed to the Church.

Back to the OP; St.Paul clarifies the stumbling block between your interpretation of the symbolic true presence and His Catholic faith in the True presence in discernment in the following, and that there is no such thing as a symbolic spirit or a symbolic Jesus.

1Corinth. 2:10-16 God has revealed to us through the Spirit…no one comprehends the thoughts o God except the Spirit of God. Now we have recieved not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which comes from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit.

The unspiritual (natural man) man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (foolish) to him, and he is not able to understand them because theyare spiritually discerned. The Spiritual man judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. For who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

So your telling me Bernard that have known the mind of the Lord? so as to instruct him? that when He say’s “This is my blood, and This is my body” without the need of the word mystery but emphatically states the reality existing because He is God and God does not lie nor can God decieve. Yet, you are claiming from a natural mindset, that you can discern the mind of the Lord so as to instruct the Lord that He never meant what he said?

When God speaks from the eternal reality that is mysterious to us but made known to those who have the Spirit of God and the mind of Christ that describe spiritual realities in spiritual terms. Yet, you claim to be able to discern the Lord from the natural implying that God has lied to us, when He the creator of all things speaks “this is my blood, this is my body”?

In any case where is the apostle directly referencing any particular Mystery here?

He already has in all of his epistles. The baptised Corinthians know of what Mysteries Paul administers to them, because he tells them to "regard us, as servants of Christ AND Stewards of the Mysteries of God. Baptism is a mystery of God that Paul administers in the priesthood of Christ and a steward of the sacraments, Mysterium, Mysteries of God.

In regards to the last supper, no body question’s God, when He speaks. Besides God does not have to use the word mystery, because His eternal reality is never mystery to God. Yet Paul and Peter are stewards of these mysteries, and speak of the saving power of God through the mysteries/sacraments/mysterium, because they don’t speak as God does, they speak as servants and stewards of the mysteries of God.

cont;

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

cont;

Bernard Lyons; The remembrance or memorial of the Lord’s supper is to us not just a moment ( as such) ,but the significance ,or meaning that the whole ( we believe) symbolised and it’s significance in application to those who in our day,share in its reality or participate in the effects following that night " in which he was betrayed".

Your definition here, falls just short of the Church’s teaching from the biblical understanding of “parousia”. Which is not only our faith in the second coming of Jesus, that is made present to us in the Eucharist as a foretaste that is made present on earth from the eternal reality. But our rememberance and memorial is realized in the present, because God makes it so.

If your symbolic or memorial recollection of a past event is your faith? Then you appear to be implying Jesus is never present in the Eucharist today, so Jesus does not save me and promise me into eternal life, but Jesus only did it once only for the first century Christians, therefore, because Jesus is no longer present to you, then how can Jesus save you, if His real presence does not come sacramentally to us in the Eucharist.

Your symbolic Jesus or symbolic presence and memorial does not do anything for you. God has to be present to give you grace and life. Yet you say Jesus is not present to you. Then how can you go to the Father without the True presence of Jesus body, blood, soul and divinity?

I would deduce from what you claim here about a symbolic spirit, Jesus or last supper recalling a memorial of a past event. You place God in a bottle and limit the powers of the Holy Spirit to your own natural understanding, when it is God who teaches us not man.

Peace be with you

 

[Bernard_Lyons]

cont;

Your definition here, falls just short of the Church’s teaching from the biblical understanding of “parousia”. Which is not only our faith in the second coming of Jesus, that is made present to us in the Eucharist as a foretaste that is made present on earth from the eternal reality. But our rememberance and memorial is realized in the present, because God makes it so.

To believe in the symbolic nature of " the supper" has no less a significance to us who presently also claim to possess the the reality that the symbol pictures" Christ in you the hope of Glory"
I personally believe ( the supper) it does not show a present coming or " parousia " but like the figure of baptism( we believe also is symbolic) it openly declares a previous coming( into to the heart) of Christ the Saviour. This of course is a continuous feasting for us ( upon his body and in the cup) but by the supper do we not “show the Lord’s death until he come” rather than show his coming at the memorial?

If your symbolic or memorial recollection of a past event is your faith? Then you appear to be implying Jesus is never present in the Eucharist today, so Jesus does not save me and promise me into eternal life, but Jesus only did it once only for the first century Christians, therefore, because Jesus is no longer present to you, then how can Jesus save you, if His real presence does not come sacramentally to us in the Eucharist.

In short 1Corinthians 1:21"For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God,it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe"

We hold that as was true then: so now ,we are saved by the preached word,and are also sustained by the same sent ministry: even that seen in Romans 10:13-15.

Your symbolic Jesus or symbolic presence and memorial does not do anything for you. God has to be present to give you grace and life. Yet you say Jesus is not present to you. Then how can you go to the Father without the True presence of Jesus body, blood, soul and divinity?

We believe that as is seen in John chapter 17:21 that both the Father and the Son ( by the indwelling Holy Ghost) is ever present to us and in us." I in them ,and thou in me ,that they may be made perfect in one"( verse 23) And that because ( verse 8) we have received his words and believed that the father has sent him.“for I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received. Them ,and have known surlely that I came out from thee”

/QUOTE]*

For those trusting in the coming Messiah the Passover lamb was it not to be a remembrance " for ever" (Exodus12:14) ?
So is the supper to us : that is its reality for those believers in the benefits thereof.*

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Bernard Lyons;11744335]To believe in the symbolic nature of " the supper" has no less a significance to us who presently also claim to possess the the reality that the symbol pictures" Christ in you the hope of Glory"

I respect your personal view, but it has no biblical or support from the first Jewish/Christians practices of a symbolic Jesus or symbolic passover practiced at every breaking of the bread, cup of blessing and prayers. Your view is never biblical and has no witnesses from antiquity holding to such a view.

Pictures?? or do you mean Icons? Pictures or Icons are never symbols in Catholicism. If you think life exist in a photograph or plaster of statue, you got Catholicism all wrong, and have entered into idolatry.

I personally believe ( the supper) it does not show a present coming or " parousia " but like the figure of baptism( we believe also is symbolic) it openly declares a previous coming( into to the heart) of Christ the Saviour. This of course is a continuous feasting for us ( upon his body and in the cup) but by the supper do we not “show the Lord’s death until he come” rather than show his coming at the memorial?

I believe you misunderstand; In the most Holy Eucharist and the sacraments, we become partakers of His divine nature (2 Peter 1:4).

From your personal view, this can never be done with a symbolic Jesus, or prefigured baptism. For scripture clearly states baptism saves you now, and Jesus said you will never see or enter the kingdom without baptism. Who wants to be saved by a figure of baptism that does nothing?

The True presence of God has to be present in only to be saved. That is why Jesus gave us His priesthood to administer the Eucharist, baptism and the power to forgive and retain sin.

I know you don’t have a minister in your community that holds to Jesus teaching, when he gave the Church the power to forgive and retain sin. Our priests can only forgive and retain sin, in the sacrament of reconciliation, when Jesus is present in this personal sacrament. Catholics here are holding to biblical teachings.

Man’s memory or intellect can not save him. Thus far your personal view only attributes to your personal memory and your own intellect, that you believe saves you. When only God can save you.

In short 1Corinthians 1:21"For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God,it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe"

We hold that as was true then: so now ,we are saved by the preached word,and are also sustained by the same sent ministry: even that seen in Romans 10:13-15.

That’s a 20th century interpretation of the text. Please provide a source from antiquity who can give support to your interpretation of this text.

Here is a clue of the whole context supported by all the New Testament practiced for over 2000 years in the Catholic Church.

The Word, the Blood, the Water and the Spirit (Sacraments) is what gives true testimony of God. God does not accept your testimony or from any man. Only God can give testimony of God.

Read 1John 5:6-12. There are only three witnesses that give testimony of God. We believe the True presence is in our midst during the Eucharistic liturgy because we have all three, the blood, the water and the Spirit.

The blood is the true presence of Jesus because the Word declares it so in His Eucharist, the Water is what saves you now that gave testimony on the cross when it flowed from the pierced side of Jesus.

Look to the Crucifixion and see not a picture but the true presence of the Eucharist. The Spirit whom Jesus sends to us is the one who gives witness of these sacramental mysteries of God. Never man or an opinion of man.

cont.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

cont;

We believe that as is seen in John chapter 17:21 that both the Father and the Son ( by the indwelling Holy Ghost) is ever present to us and in us." I in them ,and thou in me ,that they may be made perfect in one"( verse 23) And that because ( verse 8) we have received his words and believed that the father has sent him.“for I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received. Them ,and have known surlely that I came out from thee”

/QUOTE]

**You are only disclosing words from the intellect that do not prove what God has done. You do not reveal how God made known his presence to His children “IN HIM, WITH HIM AND THROUGH HIM”. Please provide proof of how God reveals this to you, that you are in Christ and the Father.

Remember know one goes to the Father without the Son. A symbolic Jesus can never get one into the “holy of holies with the true blood presence that speaks more eloquently than Abels”. You need the Eucharist. But I will wait for your faith response of how you can prove you are in Jesus and His Father?.**

You have added “by the indwelling Holy Ghost” to a gospel text that never states or implies such a statement. Why do you infect the teachings of Christ with man made ideologies? Your thought does not exist with Christ thought in that text. Christ never states nor hints at what you inserted to John 17:21.

How can you be one with Jesus if you do not believe in His True body, blood, that give testimony of HIs divinity? How can you be one with Jesus and His Father, if do not partake of His divinity in the True presence of His Sacraments.

Your intellect or memory cannot be one with Jesus true presence, Your symbolic faith cannot be one with Jesus True presence. How then can you be One with Jesus and His Father if you do not have the True presence of the Son?

If this question raises doubt, know that Jesus makes his presence known to us mystically in, with and through His sacraments that He himself consecrated and gave to the Church to administer His life saving grace to every believer who believes.

For those trusting in the coming Messiah the Passover lamb was it not to be a remembrance " for ever" (Exodus12:14) ?
So is the supper to us : that is its reality for those believers in the benefits thereof

.

No you are mistaken, that is never what God intended. The mystery is remain perpetual not only in Zakor making the event present in every age, but God’s saving act is brought to the present for all ages which can only be done by God’s True Presence.

If you are calling these mysteries of God from the intellect of memory, you have missed the Messiah and the Passover perpetual sacrifice that is made present to all peoples and tongues in every age for the forgiveness of sins.

A memory or symbolic supper can never forgive sins, give grace or save anyone. Only the True Presence of Jesus body, blood witnessed by the Holy Spirit in the Eucharistic LIturgy which is the eternal perpetual passover that fulfills God’s Word from the Exodus.

Jesus made the Last Passover eternally perpetual once and for all. His saving act did not stop in the first century. God’s saving act is perpetual for all ages made present so that God gives His Saving Grace with His presence Known by the believer.

God can never save anyone if God is never present. There exist no symbolic Jesus, or symbolic Spirit in scripture or from the memory of man.

Peace be with you

 

[Kliska]

Our emphasis tends to be on Jesus as Jesus, not Eucharistic host as Jesus. Jesus as God, Jesus as Man. Jesus literally living, dying, raising. The life we have in Jesus is provided by the Holy Spirit indwelling us. To try to reduce our belief to belief in “mere symbol” is to misunderstand most protestant beliefs. Our faith is the literal Jesus, seated at the right hand of the Father, and all He has literally done.

As to how we know we are in Christ… the Spirit testifies to our spirit.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Our emphasis tends to be on Jesus as Jesus, not Eucharistic host as Jesus. Jesus as God, Jesus as Man. Jesus literally living, dying, raising. The life we have in Jesus is provided by the Holy Spirit indwelling us. To try to reduce our belief to belief in “mere symbol” is to misunderstand most protestant beliefs. Our faith is the literal Jesus, seated at the right hand of the Father, and all He has literally done.

As to how we know we are in Christ… the Spirit testifies to our spirit.

Who believes in Eucharistic host “AS” Jesus? You have to grasp at the mystical presence as understood sacramentally by the Catholic Church revealed by Jesus Himself these past 2000 years.

To understand that TRue presence of Jesus body, blood, soul and divinity is present Eucharistia in thanksgiving, never “AS” Jesus. The bread and wine of the Eucharist are no longer bread and wine but have transubstantiated into the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus CHrist True presence.

I am not trying to reduces your belief system, I am hoping to understand how your faith can deduce the Holy Spirit indwells in you, without the presence of the Trinity?

Thus far, You mention the Holy Spirit dwells in you, all I ask is can you explain how has God revealed this to you, with His presence being made to you?

It appears you have a Spirit existing without the true presence of the Father and the Son? When the blessed TRinity is never divided.

Explain how the Holy Spirit is present to you, that reveals the bread and wine are symbolos of Jesus body and blood, and how the Holy Spirit dwells in you, when you dont’ believe in a TRue presence of Jesus?

If you have the Spirit of God in you, how is it, that you can divide the Spirit of God from the TRue presence of Jesus body and blood? by not believing in His TRue body, blood presence in the Eucharist?

Peace be with you

 

[Bernard_Lyons]

cont;

/QUOTE]

You are only disclosing words from the intellect that do not prove what God has done. You do not reveal how God made known his presence to His children “IN HIM, WITH HIM AND THROUGH HIM”. Please provide proof of how God reveals this to you, that you are in Christ and the Father.

(1) A good tree is known by its ( good) fruit.
As a former Roman Catholic myself ,I can understand how you could find difficultly in accepting “mere” faith in what Jesus has done on my behalf as anything more than sheer presumption.
God in three persons ,I believe has made me a new creature and that through that blood “that speaketh( present tense) better things than (that of)Abel”
How was this acceptance (or " accepted in the Beloved" )made known to me?

1Peter 23(I believe ) gives the answer:“Being born again,not of corruptible seed,but of incorruptible ,by the word of God ,which liveth and abide the for ever”

Remember know one goes to the Father without the Son. A symbolic Jesus can never get one into the “holy of holies with the true blood presence that speaks more eloquently than Abels”. You need the Eucharist. But I will wait for your faith response of how you can prove you are in Jesus and His Father?.

You have added “by the indwelling Holy Ghost” to a gospel text that never states or implies such a statement. Why do you infect the teachings of Christ with man made ideologies? Your thought does not exist with Christ thought in that text. Christ never states nor hints at what you inserted to John 17:21.

Would you then exclude ( “as man made ideologies” ) the Holy Ghost from this oneness Jesus relates to his Father ?John 17:21" That they all may be one; as thou ,Father art in me,and I in thee,that they also may be one in us"
I know you do believe that the Holy Spirit is inseparable from the Father and the Son: So why exclude him now,from the unity spoken here,that is being " one in us" ?

Besides,as we hold the unity and consensus that the oneness of all scripture speaks with harmony; " 1:Corinthians 12:3" no man can say that Jesus is The Lord,but by the Holy Ghost"(KJV)

Was Peters confession in Matthew(16:16) “Thou art the Christ ,the Son of the living God”
An Ideology ,because ( in relation to 1Cor12:3) no mention is made to the Holy Ghost; but it was revealed (verse17) by: “my Father which is in heaven”?

 

[Kliska]

Who believes in Eucharistic host “AS” Jesus? You have to grasp at the mystical presence as understood sacramentally by the Catholic Church revealed by Jesus Himself these past 2000 years.

To understand that TRue presence of Jesus body, blood, soul and divinity is present Eucharistia in thanksgiving, never “AS” Jesus. The bread and wine of the Eucharist are no longer bread and wine but have transubstantiated into the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus CHrist True presence.

To transubstantiate is to literally change substance. The “host” is that because it is indeed seen to be the literal Christ; body, blood, soul and divinity. If you drop the host you are dropping Him, as only the appearance of bread remains, in Platonic philosophy the appearance is not the reality of the thing, in transubstantiation it is no longer actual bread in any way, shape or form (esp. not in form), but only accidentally, which is again, not reality in Platonic thought.

I am not trying to reduces your belief system, I am hoping to understand how your faith can deduce the Holy Spirit indwells in you, without the presence of the Trinity?

Your question does not compute as I’ve given my answer from scripture; the Spirit, that is God Himself, testifies to my spirit. Are you denying that protestants have the Holy Spirit?

It appears you have a Spirit existing without the true presence of the Father and the Son? When the blessed TRinity is never divided.

Exactly; if you have the Spirit, you have God. To try to make it like protestants don’t have the indwelling of the Spirit is treading on dangerous ground, given that the RCC’s position is that baptism is the key. I’ve been validly baptized according to the RCC; so do I have God indwelling me or not?

If you have the Spirit of God in you, how is it, that you can divide the Spirit of God from the TRue presence of Jesus body and blood? by not believing in His TRue body, blood presence in the Eucharist?

Peace be with you

And with your spirit.

Because Jesus is Jesus apart from the Eucharist, even if we grant that the Eucharist transubstantiates, that is not limiting Jesus to the Eucharist. (It also certainly does not limit the Spirit nor the Father.) How can you have Jesus when the host dissolves? It’s the same question. Does Jesus ever leave us or forsake us? No, He doesn’t. I’m in the presence of the Trinity, and He, God, is with me 24/7/365.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Bernard Lyons;11747490](1) A good tree is known by its ( good) fruit.
As a former Roman Catholic myself ,I can understand how you could find difficultly in accepting “mere” faith in what Jesus has done on my behalf as anything more than sheer presumption.

A Former Roman Catholic would and should understand what a sacrament is and does and who it is that is adminstrating the graces that save you. You have not demonstrated to me a saving faith to me here.

I can show you works from my faith of what Christ has done. You have only spoken words that reveal no faith and you have yet to prove how the Holy Spirit saves you without the presence of Jesus Christ. I am still waiting for you to demonstrate your mere faith without any work From God’s presence.

God in three persons ,I believe has made me a new creature and that through that blood “that speaketh( present tense) better things than (that of)Abel”
How was this acceptance (or " accepted in the Beloved" )made known to me?

You believe because the Church has recorded those revelations of God’s saving action and grace. But you fail to reveal here and declare “HOW” is it that God has saved you?

What blood?? "that speaketh (present tense)!!! becareful your starting to sound like a Catholic. Please tell me how that blood that speaketh is made present to you? that convinces your faith that God has saved you?

You may not know it yet? But your baptism graces that saved you at your baptism, will begin to reveal to you what you think you have left, but already had. You were probably missing your confirmation and recieved it, when you called out to Him. Now you think you hear our shepherds voice from a different shepherd. Sorry, Bernard your baptism guarantees, your salvation, not your memory or intellect nor your faith only can save you., if you keep digging into these sacred mysteries, which I am happy to re-introduce to you.

1Peter 23(I believe ) gives the answer:“Being born again,not of corruptible seed,but of incorruptible ,by the word of God ,which liveth and abide the for ever”

Ok, then Iask you again? How did you become born again? and what was it that changed your corruption to incorruptibility?

If you think by the Word of God? then explain how the Word of God without any true presence saved you? Can you help me here?

cont;

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

cont;

Would you then exclude ( “as man made ideologies” ) the Holy Ghost from this oneness Jesus relates to his Father ?John 17:21" That they all may be one; as thou ,Father art in me,and I in thee,that they also may be one in us"

Never, because my Catholic faith professes that the Son is consubstantial with the Father and the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son. God has revealed this to His body the Church the bulwark of TRUTH.

My faith is based on God’s revelation, not man made ideologies. I can prove this. You seem to be having trouble revealing your faith, that God can save you without being present. I am die-ing to hear how God does this from your professed faith?

I know you do believe that the Holy Spirit is inseparable from the Father and the Son: So why exclude him now,from the unity spoken here,that is being " one in us" ?

I Know Catholic faith believes and has recieved this divine revelation from God. And I just introduced it above of the procession. My faith I can give a testimony for. But you have not been able to give me a straight answer of how you are one with the Son? without the true presence of the Son?

When you refuse to believe in the divine economy of the sacramental order which God ordained Holy so as to be present in them to save humanity.

So how can you be one in the Son with the Father, when the Son’s body, blood, soul and divinity is never present in a symbolic bread and grape juice?

Besides,as we hold the unity and consensus that the oneness of all scripture speaks with harmony; " 1:Corinthians 12:3" no man can say that Jesus is The Lord,but by the Holy Ghost"(KJV)

Jesus being Lord is not the question here, His True presence is the question? Even demons know who Jesus is.

A demon proves from scripture always wants to “RUNN OFT” every time from the True Presence of Jesus Christ. It appears your Spirit of faith, runs away from the True presence of Jesus Christ. Unless you can give a reason for your symbolic faith and memory faith that you have yet to prove your faith saves you?

Was Peters confession in Matthew(16:16) “Thou art the Christ ,the Son of the living God”
An Ideology ,because ( in relation to 1Cor12:3) no mention is made to the Holy Ghost; but it was revealed (verse17) by: “my Father which is in heaven”?

Matthew 16:16. reveals my Catholic faith profession from the Creed. Let me help you here. There is never no need of the Holy Spirit to be mentioned. Because God sent the Son, the Son is present before Simon bar Jona. But your faith never has Jesus body, blood present, so Matthew 16:16 can never work for your faith.

The Father sends the Son, the Son is the Word of God in flesh and blood before Simon. Simon hears the Word, “Who do you say that I AM”? The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father in and through the Son, whom the Son being present proceeds from the Father the Word “who do you say that I AM”? that the Holy Spirit proceeding and also from the Son because He is present in body and blood, that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Word of God “who do you say that I AM”. God the Father revealed in the power of the Holy Spirit who just proceeded from the Son in His Word in the hearing of Simon.

The HolySpirit revealed to Simon what the Father revealed to him from heaven, that Simon professed not from flesh and blood did not reveal this, but "My Father in heaven has revealed this to Simon bar jona, that Jesus from this sign from heaven builds His Church upon Peter, not Martin Luther and reformers who never existed yet. I have a whole lot to share with you.

But I hope you can get our discussion over the hurdle, in answer to my interest’s and question of your symbolic faith.

Peace be with you

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Kliska;11747491]To transubstantiate is to literally change substance.

Wrong; your definition is platonic, erroneous and deceptive. Your transubstantiate definition is worldly and holds to a scientific natural order of Aristotles natural definition of Transubstantiation that has a literal substance change.

You just gave to Ceasar what belongs to God and gave to God what belongs to Ceasar. Your definition is never the dogma of Transubstantiation defined by the Catholic church.

NIce try though. We should discuss more so that you don’t decieve other’s of your false definition with the Church’s definition of Transubstantiation. Close but no prize sorry:shrug:

The “host” is that because it is indeed seen to be the literal Christ; body, blood, soul and divinity

.

Nope the host is not the accidents appearing as bread and wine to our flesh. And nope, the “host” is not the literal Christ; body, blood, soul and divinity. Wrong again. Where did you get this heretical teaching? Because It is never Catholic.

If you drop the host you are dropping Him, as only the appearance of bread remains, in Platonic philosophy the appearance is not the reality of the thing, in transubstantiation it is no longer actual bread in any way, shape or form (esp. not in form), but only accidentally, which is again, not reality in Platonic thought.

I think you should drop the Host definition all together and stick to what you should learn more about what the Eucharist is, and the True presence of Jesus body, blood. The Host brings in a lot more to who Jesus is from the divine economy. Which this discussion has not graduated to such a level yet.Besides the Catholic Church never states the Host is “AS” Jesus. Remove this from your vocabulary in addressing the Eucharist because it is never Catholic

Your question does not compute as I’ve given my answer from scripture; the Spirit, that is God Himself, testifies to my spirit. Are you denying that protestants have the Holy Spirit?

I am not the one who is putting God in a box here. Your faith proclaims that God’s true presence does not exist with the human race, but only your faith is all that needed. But I have difficulty understanding how God save you without Him not being present to you.

You claim that God himself, testifies to your spirit? How can your faith be true, when Jesus revealed “NO ONE goes to the Father with out the Son”. Yet you claim God himself testifies to your spirit without the Son ever being present to your spirit. Yet your faith is testifying that the Blessed Trinity is divided, because God testifies to your spirit what? God does not work that way, for “no man see’s God and lives”. Yet your faith appears to be contradicting the bible here.

I hope you can clarify your faith, how God testifies to your spirit, without the Son’s True Presence and the Holy Spirit proceeding eternally?

Can you explain how “God himself” testifies to my (your) spirit"? If you cannot give an answer? can you give an example of how God testifies to your spirit? I would really humbly ask for a reply please.

Exactly; if you have the Spirit, you have God. To try to make it like protestants don’t have the indwelling of the Spirit is treading on dangerous ground, given that the RCC’s position is that baptism is the key. I’ve been validly baptized according to the RCC; so do I have God indwelling me or not?

This subject is not about whether or not protestants have the Holy Spirit or not. We are discussing how can your protestant faith save you without the True presence of Jesus body, blood real presence. You deny or reject the sacraments instituted by Jesus Christ, in the Eucharist and baptism, of the blood and the water which is God the Father giving Testimony of God the Son through these True and real substantial presence.

God does not accept testimony from man. Yet you claim your Spirit is testified by God? How if you do not believe in His Son’s True presence that comes to us sacramentally via the Eucharist.

Because Jesus is Jesus apart from the Eucharist, even if we grant that the Eucharist transubstantiates, that is not limiting Jesus to the Eucharist. (It also certainly does not limit the Spirit nor the Father.) How can you have Jesus when the host dissolves? It’s the same question. Does Jesus ever leave us or forsake us? No, He doesn’t. I’m in the presence of the Trinity, and He, God, is with me 24/7/365.

NO ONE dictates what or when God can do anything, Only the begotten Son has seen the Father in heaven and does the Father’s will.

The Father does not proceed from no one. Yet you claim God testifies to your spirit without the Son’s True and real presence.

Your faith becomes a contradiction to the Blessed Trinity and the procession to which God has revealed himself to our humanity. God does not lie nor can God decieve. You place God in contradiction to His Word, when you claim you have God without the True presence of God’s Son body, blood, soul and divinity.

You hold to the Spirit as if He is never a person divine living and accurring as the Lord the giver of Life. Your faith if holds to a symbolic Spirit which does not exist, then your theology from man fits your bill of faith. Yet because the Spirit is a living person in the God head, your spirit theology falls apart and does not hold up to sacred scripture.

Your baptism carries with it the graces to enter these mysteries of God who reveals them. Man does not teach you, God does.

Let go of your man made heretical view’s of His Eucharist and allow yourself to hear for the first time what the bulwark of Truth (the Catholic Church) has been given to reveal to all of God’s children in every age.

Your discussion is interesting and I hope informative to all who read them, and that you more to add to our discussion.

Peace be with you

 

[Kliska]

Wrong; your definition is platonic, erroneous and deceptive. Your transubstantiate definition is worldly and holds to a scientific natural order of Aristotles natural definition of Transubstantiation that has a literal substance change.

You just gave to Ceasar what belongs to God and gave to God what belongs to Ceasar. Your definition is never the dogma of Transubstantiation defined by the Catholic church.

NIce try though. We should discuss more so that you don’t decieve other’s of your false definition with the Church’s definition of Transubstantiation. Close but no prize sorry:shrug:

Gabriel, would you do me a favor, before we keep discussing this, and instead of me assuming I know what you mean when you say “transubstantiation” why don’t you explain it to me. Because I don’t mean any disrespect to you or the RCC, but it doesn’t seem your view is in line with what is taught in the CCC or other Catholic documents or apologetics that I’ve read, and I’ve read… a lot. Since I’m conversing with you, it would be helpful, then, to know what you believe about the Eucharist.

You are also not using the Platonic and Aristotelian words in the regular meaning… I taught this stuff in Philosophy, and I can assure you, the RCC argument is that the substance changes while the accidents remain the same. The substance of the bread is gone, the accidents remain, while the substance is Jesus; body, blood, soul and divinity. That is indeed what the RCC teaches.

Can you explain how “God himself” testifies to my (your) spirit"? If you cannot give an answer? can you give an example of how God testifies to your spirit? I would really humbly ask for a reply please.

Read the whole of 1 John over with this in mind; what John means by it is exactly what I mean by it.

This subject is not about whether or not protestants have the Holy Spirit or not.

Oh, it is about that. Either protestants are temples with the Holy Spirit residing within or not; that is something this whole conversation hinges on. I know for a fact that the Holy Spirit, God the Spirit, Himself indwells me. That should answer all your questions; if you believe protestants have the indwelling, then that answers all the rest. If you don’t believe they do, then there’s no more room for conversation, for you are denying that protestants are true Christians. Let me make this clear; Spirit does NOT equal symbolic. The Holy Spirit is a full Person of the Trinity.

 

[rcwitness]

The issue of Protestantism’s symbolic view is not necessarily bad. When a Christian genuinely is regarding that celebration as holy and receives through a conscience examined sincerely, there are benefits.

Something I think that is misunderstood with the symbolism party, is that there is an assumption that the real presence belief somehow separates the aspect of what they see as being symbolized (Spirit/Word/Life) and focusses more on a “piece” of Jesus which is not important because accepting Jesus in our hearts is sufficent.

To do this (if in fact some do…?) It is definitely not understanding the union of God’s Spirit to His human flesh, and then that union given as a Sacrament for much more grace than merely ‘remembering’.

A fundamental virtue of His Eucharistic Body and blood is to bring together all members in a common flesh. A Consumation.

Michael

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Kliska;11749414] Because I don’t mean any disrespect to you or the RCC, but it doesn’t seem your view is in line with what is taught in the CCC or other Catholic documents or apologetics that I’ve read, and I’ve read… a lot. Since I’m conversing with you, it would be helpful, then, to know what you believe about the Eucharist

.

I have come across your misunderstood views that will take words that the Church uses and redefine them in terms that the Church never uses. What is missed from your view and from what the Church teaches and reveals, becomes evident, that your view is holding to a natural definition that conflicts with the Catholic Churchs (definition) When She is describing (teaching) Christ revelations of Spiritual realities described in spiritual terms defined by the Church. More on this later.

What adds to your rejection and denial of the Eucharist True Presence, is when your view applies a natural understanding and mind set (intellectual) that contradicts the Church’s mind (revelation) of Christ. This is the crux of the matter, which I hope to engage with you, and prayerfully you will have eyes to see what is described here by me, never conflicts but fully supports what the Catholic Church defined in the dogma and revelation of the True Presence.

In addition, the Catholic Church never uses the language of theological apologetics to declare (doctrine) what Jesus Christ revealed in His Eucharist. (The theology is grounded while the doctrine and declaration is proclaimed with the mind of Christ.) This two-fold stroke or mixture of our discussion is where you find, what appears to be a contradiction when there never is one. The theology defends and protects the revelation of Jesus Christ (binds and looses) when the doctrine declares in faith the revelations of God what God has revealed, when Jesus binds and looses in heaven.

The Catholic Church proclaims this revelation with the mind of Christ infallibly protected and declared Truth in the Spirit of God. The theological fire storms of debate lead up to the pronouncement of a revelation, but Her proclamation is delivered by declaration revealed by the Holy Spirit. This is what I hope to deduce and reveal from the graces of your baptism.

cont.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

You are also not using the Platonic and Aristotelian words in the regular meaning… I taught this stuff in Philosophy, and I can assure you, the RCC argument is that the substance changes while the accidents remain the same. The substance of the bread is gone, the accidents remain, while the substance is Jesus; body, blood, soul and divinity. That is indeed what the RCC teaches.

Thank you for understanding that neither myself nor the Catholic Church never uses any platonic or Aristotelian “definition” of words to define the doctrine of the True Presence in the Eucharist.

Here is why? In your earlier post you stated the “host”, and I think you meant the bread and wine, when the Church does not, more on that later, Is the literal body, blood of Jesus Christ. The Church does not teach the bread and wine has Jesus hands and arms literally present that is a false drawn conclusion of transubstantiation.

Although you quote the substance change and accident’s grounded theology correctly that the Church uses, but it is never Aristotle’s definition and never platonic.

Aristotle’s definition of Transubstantiation has a natural substance literally change and accidents remaining that make up that substance in the natural from the “Cause and effect” that created that substance change in the natural.

The Church’s definition of Transubstantiation, defines the substance change that can never be measured or quantified, this mind of Christ definition supersedes all of Aristotle’s Philosophy in the natural dust. The accidents that remain say’s the Catholic Church is considered God’s miracle, not Platonic or Aristotles definition in the natural order of things.

When the Word of God sent from the Father and the HolySpirit proceeding undivided Trinity, reveals the True presence in the Eucharist. I hope to clarify this doctrine defeats a symbolic or intellectual memorial view later. A miracle takes place, Just as Jesus appeared to the disciples on the Road to Emmaus and in the locked room. Jesus True presence is revealed in the Eucharist. Here must engage the difference between the “Essence of God” and the “True Presence of God”. This is another revelation of God given to the Church that most protestants are never taught in protestantism, thus they become divided into many different believing bodies in search of this Truth, which the Catholic Church was given by Jesus Christ himself. More on this later.

Back to the accident’s and the miracle of God. At Jesus consecration of the bread and wine (Eucharist). The Church teaches; The substance of bread and wine that can be measured and quantified, is truly and substantialy changed into the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ True presence, when God “True Presence” can never be measured or quantified, for God is Spirit. (The Spirit is eternal (cannot be measured in time and space) which supersedes the natural which returns to dust (that is measured from time and space).

The miracle is that God has allowed the bread and wine to remain (Never Aristotle) to our flesh, when it is the eternal Spirit of God who is the Lord the giver of life (proceeding) who gives life to us “in him, with, and through him” = Jesus body, blood, soul and divinity in the promise of eternal life at the consuming of the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the World.

Jesus makes clear what the Church teaches from her definition of Transubstantiation here from John 6:61 (Jesus speaks) “Do you take offence of this? Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?” “It is the Spirit that gives life, (while) the flesh is of no avail”.

Although our flesh see, taste, smell bread and wine in the miracle of the Eucharist which is of no avail, yet it is God’s Spirit that gives and bring that divine life to us. Thus as scripture proclaims, 2 Peter 1:4 “We become partakers of the divine nature”.

To partake of the divine nature, can only be done “in him, with him, and through him” Jesus Christ the Son of man, who gives us flesh and blood to consume not in the natural covenant when it is unlawful, but in the new and eternal covenant that remains perpetual, when God is all and in all amen.

Oh, it is about that. Either protestants are temples with the Holy Spirit residing within or not; that is something this whole conversation hinges on. I know for a fact that the Holy Spirit, God the Spirit, Himself indwells me. That should answer all your questions;

Sorry it does not and did not answer any of my questions? I don’t question what God can do. What I am questioning? Why do you reject the True presence of Jesus Christ in HIs Eucharist, when your theology does not understand it, in the way God has revealed himself since creation, revealed His presence to Moses sacramentally in the burning bush, sacramentally in Ark of the Covenant, in the cloud by day and in the fire by night, to Elijah in the whisper of the wind, now Incarnate eternally presently resides with the human race in His Eucharist.

You claim faith in the Word of God. You appear to be relating your faith to the spoken Word of God. For the Catholic The Word has not spoken and ended, the eternal Word of God Speaks and is living and breathing both in body and Spirit. This is where protestantism needs to graduate in the eternal True Presence of God instead of holding to past events as a celebrated memorial, when God saves from His presence eternally in His Body the Catholic Church, when Christ is our head, fully human and fully divine is the Catholic Church.

Peace be with you

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

rcwitness;11749421]The issue of Protestantism’s symbolic view is not necessarily bad

.

I would say it is sad, that protestantism left behind their roots of apostolic revelations, and invented a whole new set of man made theology that prevents them from entering the divine economy of the True Substantial Presence of Jesus Christ.

It would appear that protestantism’s view is holding to their Sola fide belief system that celebrates past events of what God has revealed, leaving them in history as if God cannot be present to them in the flesh today. That is what is sad. The symbolic view is new that runs and reject’s the power of God who say’s “this is my body and This is my blood”. Catholics say Amen to God’s Word here, Protestants applaud that God only revealed this to the apostles and not today in the present.

Something I think that is misunderstood with the symbolism party, is that there is an assumption that the real presence belief somehow separates the aspect of what they see as being symbolized (Spirit/Word/Life) and focusses more on a “piece” of Jesus which is not important because accepting Jesus in our hearts is sufficent.

That’s the problem, protestantism accepts Jesus with the heart of faith and reject the communion True presence with God, who paid the handsome price, so that God’s presence can dwell once again with the human race not just in the heart but when God is ALL and IN ALL. I don’t think God will settle for second best of just the heart of man, God Loves us and wills that we love God with all of our mind, heart, strength and soul. This Love becomes a reality only if Jesus True presence of body, blood, soul and divinity is present so that God who consumes us in His Love with His Eucharist “True Presence”.

To do this (if in fact some do…?) It is definitely not understanding the union of God’s Spirit to His human flesh, and then that union given as a Sacrament for much more grace than merely ‘remembering’.

A fundamental virtue of His Eucharistic Body and blood is to bring together all members in a common flesh. A Consumation.

Michael

Just to note Michael I agree with everything you posted here. I believe protestantism humble view of symbolism or memorial mysteriously contains a fear of God, that they do not have the theology of revelation that can graduate their faith into the True Presence of Jesus Body and Blood. They need the Catholic church’s revelation of these mysteries, but they reject Catholic doctrinal revelation from God from default, because they have never been taught correctly, or they have been decieved about God’s revelation only reveals from letters on a page (bible) and their (only) faith theology. God is much greater than what man can interpret or misinterpret from His Word in faith, God wills to dwell not just in their hearts, but communion with all of us in full body and Spirit.

When Catholics worship God in Spirit and Truth = Jesus full body and divine presence when nothing is ever lost in the Eucharist True Presence.

To believe from the heart only that God lives in you, but is never present to you in the Only Begotten Son’s body and blood true presence, when God say’s He is. Bibilical speaking has suffered a lost and a continuous search and desire for more. That is one reason for the more than thousand’s of different protestant denominations today. One should never reach a platoue or defined conclusion of God. Catholicism never attempts to define the Essence of God, nor does she exhaust the definition of God’s TRue Presence. She only declares what God has given her to declare from the Spirit of Truth who makes it known.

Peace be with you

 

[Kliska]

Gabriel, I appreciate the time you take to try to clarify your position, but I must admit, and I’m sure it’s my fault, that your explanation is not lining up with what I have read in Catholic documentation, and your perspective is a bit… over my head I suppose. I don’t think our continuing conversation would serve much good, as we are obviously talking past one another. Again, thank you for your time.