the assumption of the Virgin Mary

[Cluny]

This is a uniquely Catholic teaching and is unsubstatiated in the bible

Wrong again, Richard Kastner! It’s taught by the Orthodox, Non-Chalcedonian Churches, Old Catholics, Assyrian Church of the East, Anglicans, and Lutherans.

Even Luther and Calvin believed it.

Doesn’t it bother you to pop off about things of which you clearly know NOTHING AT ALL?

This is true. It’s just that that flesh and blood is not the eucharist. It’s THE WORD

He was talking about the Eucharist.

And John 6 makes it clear that to refuse to accept this is to WALK WITH JESUS NO MORE!

God said “Let there be light”–and there was light.

God Incarnate said, “Be healed”–and people were healed.

God Incarnate said “Be opened”–and deaf ears and blind eyes began to function.

God Incarnate said, “Take up your bed and go home”–and the lame man did.

God Incarnate said, “Your sins are forgiven”–and they were.

God Incarnate said, “This is My Body, this is My Blood”–and if you can believe that NOTHING happened, your faith is greater than mine.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

TAB39:

This is a uniquely Catholic teaching and is unsubstatiated in the bible

Ok, I misspoke again. What I meant to say is that the genesis of this doctrine is with the CC. Cluny is going to yell at me.

That is not so. There are Protestants that teach this as well without the insertions of transubstantiation and the such.

That is true, but it comes from the CC. And without the “insertions of transubstatiation” it wouldn’t be the same doctrine. Would it?

The Bible is brightly clear about the Bread that comes from Heaven being Jesus’ flesh.

This is also true it’s just that that flesh is not the so called eucharist. It’s THE WORD OF GOD
14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

And the WORD was made FLESH.

:
Jesus said that if you eat his flesh and drink his blood, you will have life within you. He expounds upon this several times in John 6. He said it at the Last Supper. He uses bread and wine to great significance.

This is also true. He tells us in v. 63 exactly what He is talking about Jn6:63b the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Way too much for it to be just simply symbolic.

What’s the criteria for being “too much”. You seem to be minimizing it’s importance because as you say it’s “simply symbolic”. Matt13: 34All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: Jesus seemed to think that speaking symboliclly was pretty important. But you seem to think that the CC teaches that Jesus is not talking symbolicly here. You need to explain that to me, if you would, because I don’t get it.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Wrong again, Richard Kastner! It’s taught by the Orthodox, Non-Chalcedonian Churches, Old Catholics, Assyrian Church of the East, Anglicans, and Lutherans.
Even Luther and Calvin believed it.

What I meant to say was this doctrine started with the CC. I knew you were going to yell at me.

Doesn’t it bother you to pop off about things of which you clearly know NOTHING AT ALL?

Not to much, I make mistakes. You probably never do tho, huh? I do know nothing except what’s in God’s word. Of that I can be sure.

He was talking about the Eucharist.

So, you don’t beleive Jesus when He says Jn6;63b the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

And John 6 makes it clear that to refuse to accept this is to WALK WITH JESUS NO MORE!

So, accept it.

God said “Let there be light”–and there was light.

God Incarnate said, “Be healed”–and people were healed.

God Incarnate said “Be opened”–and deaf ears and blind eyes began to function.

God Incarnate said, “Take up your bed and go home”–and the lame man did.

God Incarnate said, “Your sins are forgiven”–and they were.

God Incarnate said, “This is My Body, this is My Blood”–and if you can believe that NOTHING happened, your faith is greater than mine.

24And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

Jesus is here clearly telling us to DO THIS IN REMEMBRACE OF HIM. He certainly is not telling us to take a graven image (bread) to bow down before it. Wouldn’t that be in violation of the second commandment.
4Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

5Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

This is something that Jesus would not and did not do.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

He was talking about the Eucharist.

And John 6 makes it clear that to refuse to accept this is to WALK WITH JESUS NO MORE!

I’m sorry in my answer to this post. I said “So accept it” I didn’t mean to say accept what you call the eucharist. But what Jesus really says in Jn6. And that is to feed on the WORD OF GOD.

 

[elvisman]

This is a uniquely Catholic teaching and is unsubstatiated in the bible

This is true. It’s just that that flesh and blood is not the eucharist. It’s THE WORD

That’s very interesting.
Can you show me where Jesus say’s he’s speaking symbolically or metaphorically?

I’ll tell you why he was not. In the Bread of Life Discourse in John 6, Jesus tells us that we muyst eat his flesh and dring his blood - FOUR times. To drive his point across - he does NOT use the usual Greek word for human eating “phagon” - he uses a different word, “trogon”. The Greek word, Trogon, describes the way an animal eats - to munch or to gnaw. Jesus used hyperbole here to make known that he was speaking literally.

When many of the disciples found this hard to believe and left - this marked the only time in scripture that any of his followers left for doctrinal reasons.
Did Jesus call them back ad say – “Wait a minute. I was speaking metaphorically! I was talking about my word, not my flesh!!"**
NO. He said, "Does this shock you?" (v. 61)**

---

He then goes on to let them know in verse 63 WHY they can’t understand. He tells them:
***“It is the spirit *that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”
This truth could not be revealed to them because they closed their hearts to it.

He was reiterating what he told them in verse 44:
"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draw him, and I will raise him on the last day."
**

---

It’s also interesting to not that John - who wrote this discourse started his Gospel by calling Jesus, the Word and that he became flesh.

Verse 1 says:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Verse 14 states:
And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.

---

So - please show me where this was mere symbolism and not the truth.

 

[occupant]

occupant, all I hear here is you talking. If you backed this up with some scripture which I have no doubt that you cannot do. It would be more credible.

then who knew this before peter? who spoke it before peter?
richard, your bible is a product from the Catholic Church, even non-catholic historians agree. your bible is infalliable, right? doesn’t it make logical sense that the Church who gave us an infalliable book would be infalliable itself?

also, with the fast question, Jesus said His people would fast after He died. i’m willing to bet you don’t.

 

[st_lucy]

then who knew this before peter? who spoke it before peter?
richard, your bible is a product from the Catholic Church, even non-catholic historians agree. your bible is infalliable, right? doesn’t it make logical sense that the Church who gave us an infalliable book would be infalliable itself?

also, with the fast question, Jesus said His people would fast after He died. i’m willing to bet you don’t.

Well you shouldn’t have given it to him so easily.

 

[Cluny]

Ok, I misspoke again. What I meant to say is that the genesis of this doctrine is with the CC. Cluny is going to yell at me.

Quote:
That is not so. There are Protestants that teach this as well without the insertions of transubstantiation and the such.
That is true, but it comes from the CC. And without the “insertions of transubstatiation” it wouldn’t be the same doctrine. Would it?

If by “Catholic Church,” you mean the Christians in communion with Rome, again, you are wrong.

And when Jesus is called “Incarnate Word,” you think think this is a metaphor for saying that Jesus is the perfect embodiment of everything in the Bible, do you? Please answer “yes” or “no.”

As the saying goes: Better to close your mouth and be thought a fool than open it and remove all doubt.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

That’s very interesting.
Can you show me where Jesus say’s he’s speaking symbolically or metaphorically?

I’ll tell you why he was not. In the Bread of Life Discourse in John 6, Jesus tells us that we muyst eat his flesh and dring his blood - FOUR times. To drive his point across - he does NOT use the usual Greek word for human eating “phagon” - he uses a different word, “trogon”. The Greek word, Trogon, describes the way an animal eats - to munch or to gnaw. Jesus used hyperbole here to make known that he was speaking literally.

When many of the disciples found this hard to believe and left - this marked the only time in scripture that any of his followers left for doctrinal reasons.
Did Jesus call them back ad say – “Wait a minute. I was speaking metaphorically! I was talking about my word, not my flesh!!"
NO. He said, "Does this shock you?" (v. 61)

---

He then goes on to let them know in verse 63 WHY they can’t understand. He tells them:
***“It is the spirit ***that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”
This truth could not be revealed to them because they closed their hearts to it.

He was reiterating what he told them in verse 44:
"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draw him, and I will raise him on the last day."

---

It’s also interesting to not that John - who wrote this discourse started his Gospel by calling Jesus, the Word and that he became flesh.

I’ve covered this in previous posts. Ifyour so inclined you can go back and read them there. I see no reason to go over well trod gound. Except for this because it is so important.

Verse 1 says:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Verse 14 states:
And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.

---

So - please show me where this was mere symbolism and not the truth.

I have actually covered this in several posts, but it bears repeating. Jn6:53 says:Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Then jn6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. Now your verse Jn1:1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And verse 14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

It’s so clear to me I don’t know why people can’t see it. What Jesus is saying is that we are to feast on His word. That His words are spirit and they are truth. Also consider 1Cor 2:12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

then who knew this before peter? who spoke it before peter?

I’m sorry, who knew what? I don’t remember what this post was about.

richard, your bible is a product from the Catholic Church, even non-catholic historians agree. your bible is infalliable, right?

My bible came from God. That’s why we call it the word of God.

doesn’t it make logical sense that the Church who gave us an infalliable book would be infalliable itself?

God is all powerful He is able to use even the CC to His end
Isaiah 55:10For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
11So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

also, with the fast question, Jesus said His people would fast after He died. i’m willing to bet you don’t.

Ya, I kind of figured this was your motive. Well, I’m not going to answer your question. That’s between God and me, so bet away. Kind of a backhanded way of calling me not one with Christ don’t you think.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

If by “Catholic Church,” you mean the Christians in communion with Rome, again, you are wrong.

And when Jesus is called “Incarnate Word,” you think think this is a metaphor for saying that Jesus is the perfect embodiment of everything in the Bible, do you? Please answer “yes” or “no.”

As the saying goes: Better to close your mouth and be thought a fool than open it and remove all doubt.

I’m sick of putting up with your nastiness. Why don’t we just say goodby

 

[Louie1983]

Why is this unfortunate for me? I couldn’t care less if a million apostates promulgate a lie, that doesn’t make it the truth.

Ok, I refute it.

**You haven’t refuted anything! Tell me Richard, if you believe that the teachings of the church are corrupted by man then why would anyone listen to you? are you not man? the difference here is that Jesus himself passed his authority onto his holy church (peter and the apostles). If he allowed for everyone to interpret the bible their own way then you would clearly have the major problems evident in protestantism today. **
If you mean the doctors and fathers of the Catholic faith. That’s exactly what I am doing.

If you are questioning the teachings of the early fathers who gave you the bible then explain to me how the faith was preached before the bible was put together? Why did tongues of fire (holy spirit) descend on the disciples? at that time, the disciples were not the only ones to have accepted out lord as saviour! The doctors and early church fathers had direct links to the apostles as they were direct students of them. Therefore you question the disciples! Is this what you are doing Richard?

I never said that it had to be in the bible to be true. There may even be some Catholic teachings that are true (ie. the trinity) But if it’s the word of man it can’t be 100% trusted. The bible can be.

**You didn’t need to say it, it is painfully evident in your discussion and posts. **

Paul was talking specifically to the church at Thessolenica.

**What church was that richard? were their any other churches at the time? NO, there was only the Catholic church. Your poor exegis of scripture is painfully evident. **
The church certainly is the pillar of truth and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. That church however is not the Catholic church.

**Then explain to me why the same faith was taught for 1500 years before the reformation? There were no other denominations before Luther came along. Explain to me why protestants accept homosexuality when the bible clearly condemns it?

You have provided nothing in your aguments, you have quoted scripture and your own incorrect interpretations which are littered with error!**

 

[Louie1983]

I’m sorry, who knew what? I don’t remember what this post was about.

My bible came from God. That’s why we call it the word of God.

**It contains the word of God and the word was Jesus. **

God is all powerful He is able to use even the CC to His end
Isaiah 55:10For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
11So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Ya, I kind of figured this was your motive. Well, I’m not going to answer your question. That’s between God and me, so bet away. Kind of a backhanded way of calling me not one with Christ don’t you think.

You have no answer to this, that’s why you won’t answer it.

 

[Louie1983]

There may be, but if the assumption is an example of that truth I’m not interested. The bible has everything in it that I need to gain eternal life. Again, How am I cutting myself short?

How are you cutting yourself short? by your incorrect and heretic interpretation of scripture! You say you place no faith in the catholic church as you believe it has been corrupted by man, However you are interpreting the scripture in your own way? are you not man also?

Let’s say i was a protestant as well, and you and i were to have a discussion about a certain passage in the bible but disagreed on what the message was, then how would we know what the correct is? there has to be an authority with the bible that guides and explains to us scripture. this is done by the holy spirit and through the holy Catholic Church.

Your idea of interpretaing the scripture however you want to causes confusion and division (and if you don’t believe me, then why are there thousands of different protestant denominations?). did Christ wish to cause confusion and division?

 

[Louie1983]

I don’t get it. What do you think 1Cor11:27 has to do with Jn6:53

Clearly you don’t!

This was directed towards your unbelief towards the real presence in the Eucharist.

 

[st_lucy]

How are you cutting yourself short? by your incorrect and heretic interpretation of scripture! You say you place no faith in the catholic church as you believe it has been corrupted by man, However you are interpreting the scripture in your own way? are you not man also?

Let’s say i was a protestant as well, and you and i were to have a discussion about a certain passage in the bible but disagreed on what the message was, then how would we know what the correct is? there has to be an authority with the bible that guides and explains to us scripture. this is done by the holy spirit and through the holy Catholic Church.

I think I am beginning to understand Richard here, he believes that man can interpret scripture with out a church. So all he needs is the bible to interpret the bible, but if anyone contradicts him their interpretation has to be wrong. But if he believes in self interpretation, shouldn’t our interpretation also be right? And if two people who are of like mind just happen to disagree with the others interpretation what then, OH WAIT the bible says to take to the CHURCH!

Wow what a crazy world you live in Richard.

On a side note I think I will point out that tend use too much “I” in your interpretations of the bible.

 

[Des]

.

What are you afraid of Des? Why do you feel threatened by the truth? If I have said anything contrary to the word of God. Show it to me and I will retract and prayfully revise it.

I already have. How about showing me comething that actually agrees with what you’re stating.
And Richard, nothing that you preach scares me. And there is no verse that threatens me. I’ll continue to take my side with the ones who put forth your little collections of books called The Bible.

Actually I do have such a promise. 13Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

You seriously think He was talking to you when He said that? Can you also bind and loose, and forgive and retain sins? And if He was referring to you and all you little individual protestants, then everytime you preach error the Spirit has failed. Oh that’s right, you’re ignoring the Spirit of Truth that time and you don’t even know you’re doing it.

I’m sorry, didn’t you say that this was NOT talking about Christ’s body. I’ve been answering a lot of posts and I thought that was your position.

I said that one particular verse wasn’t. The rest was.

Jn6:53Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
My position is that Jesus is talking about feasting on THE WORD
Jn1:14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Jn5:39Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
Jn17:17Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
It all points to Jesus THE WORD.

Well it’s a shame as others have pointed out here that your ‘entire’ interpretation falls flat in the context of the ‘entire’ chapter.

Jn6:63It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
What Jesus is telling us is that the flesh or the spirit of the world profits us nothing, but His words lead us to eternal life.

Jesus was saying this to His Disciples. Why? Because they started to murmur and doubt what He was saying since they actually thought he was talking about cannibalism. So Christ was re-emphasizing that He wasn’t talking about dead flesh separated from the Spirit but of Spirit and Life that Eucharist gives us after we partake in it.
Nowhere does he ever say he was talking symbolically.

From the CCC:

**“Do this in memory of me” **

1341 The command of Jesus to repeat his actions and words “until he comes” does not only ask us to remember Jesus and what he did. It is directed at the liturgical celebration, by the apostles and their successors, of the memorial of Christ, of his life, of his death, of his Resurrection, and of his intercession in the presence of the Father.[165]

 

[Louie1983]

Well, what the bible actually says does not seem to bear out what you say. I have seen Catholics bring up this passage ad infinitum as proof that Jesus set Peter up as the head of His church on earth. Nothing could be further from the truth. The trouble is they always seem to start at verse 18. When the passage really starts at verse 13. Here is the entire passage:

13When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

You will notice that Jesus contrary to what you say is addressing “his disciples” and this first question is key to understanding the whole passage He asks them “Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?” He doesn’t ask them who do people say that Peter is but
“Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?” The answer comes back “Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.” This comes back from the disciples in general. The next question is directed to the disciples specifically, “But whom say ye that I am?” Again He doesn’t ask them about Peter but about Himself. Peter because of his great faith in who Jesus is answers first “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Again Peter is talking about Jesus, not himself. This answer is very important. We need to ask ourselves who Jesus is to us? Is He The Christ, The Annointed in our lives, or is it some pretender to His throne? Jesus then says that This answer did not come from Peter, but from the Father. Now After Jesus had been talking and inquireing about Himself. You say He suddenly switches gears and starts talking about Peter. I don’t think so. If you do a bible search on the word rock you will come up with many many instances were Rock refers to God. Here are a couple.

15 Jeshurun [d] grew fat and kicked;
filled with food, he became heavy and sleek.
He abandoned the God who made him
and rejected the Rock his Savior.
16 They made him jealous with their foreign gods
and angered him with their detestable idols.
17 They sacrificed to demons, which are not God—
gods they had not known,
gods that recently appeared,
gods your fathers did not fear.
18 You deserted the Rock, who fathered you;
you forgot the God who gave you birth.

Not once do they refer to Peter. When Jesus says:18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. He is not saying that He is going to build His church on Peter who was an imperfect sinner against whom the gates of hell would prevail in a few days when he denied “the Rock his Savior”, but that He was going to build His church on Himself. The Rock of Ages

Incorrect once again Richard.

You just further proved my point by quoting from verse 13! It demonstrates even further that Christ intended on building his Church on Peter! Yes he is addressing them but who out of the apostles who answers correctly? Why did he DIRECTLY address Peter when he said "* “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven”* Why didn’t he say this to all the apostles or anyone who believed in him for that matter?

You say "Peter because of his great faith in who Jesus is answers first “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Again Peter is talking about Jesus, not himself. This answer is very important. We need to ask ourselves who Jesus is to us? Is He The Christ, The Annointed in our lives, or is it some pretender to His throne?

Ofcourse he is talking about Christ! However Jesus is giving Peter authority to loose and bound sins here on earth! Jesus is Lord and saviour, he works through his Holy Catholic Church and he promises “the gates of hell shall prevail against it”, Jesus is promising infallibility! Are you saying Jesus is lying here? how can you reconcile Jesus’ words here with protestantism when protestants are free to believe the scriptures how they wish to and yet differ on many points? We need an authority outside the bible to guide us! The holy spirit though the Catholic Church!

Also, Jesus builds His Church (“ecclesia”) upon the person of Peter. Jesus changes Simon’s name to “Kepha,” and says that on this “Kepha” He will build the Church. Kepha, in Aramaic (the language Jesus spoke), means a massive rock formation, and Jesus’ use of Kepha to rename Peter signifies Peter’s foundational leadership in the Church. (See also Mark 3:16 and John 1:42 where Jesus renames Simon “Cephas” which is a transliteration of the Aramaic “Kepha.”). Only the Catholic Church recognizes and proves through an unbroken lineage of successors that her foundation is Peter. He is giving authority to Peter for his Chruch on Earth!

I will pray for you Richard that the lord will bring you home to his Holy Catholic Church.

 

[Cluny]

You just go ahead and believe what you want to believe, Richard.

I’ll believe our Lord, God, and Saviour Jesus Christ and His Holy Word.

 

[Louie1983]

Having now had a chance to look at it, I think I can safely say that the webpage in question has some good quotes, but does not by any means do what was advertised. (I guess it illustrates the saying “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.” )

Hi Peter,

"but does not by any means do what was advertised"

Really? try this link,

scripturecatholic.com/primacy_of_peter.html#tradition_III