The Case Against Transubstantiation

[wisdomseeker]

It is not a question of what I believe. It is a question of how do you determine the truth of something claiming to be a revelation from God. You ask, “Do I believe in the OT?” In answer I turn that question back to you again: How do you know that the OT is a revelation from God? How do you know that it is not a book of fables, as many people believe it is? How do you know that the miracles of Moses, or Joshua, or Elijah, or Elisha, or Daniel, or Isaiah, or Jeremiah ever happened? How do you know they are not fairy tales? The answer is that you don’t. You have no way of empirically and independently determining that they ever happened. You accept in faith that they did. The same is true for us about the miracles of Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants. We accept in faith that they are true, because the Spirit of the Lord witnesses to us that they are true.

zerinus

does God uses His own Spirit to contradicts Himself? if the Sacred Scriptures is a fable than your religion must be a fable too right? unless your religion is not based on the Sacred Scriptures of God the Creator. so here i ask again do you take the OT as true or not?

 

[justinthemartyr]

It is not a question of whether He could do such a thing or not; but of whether it is true Christian doctrine that He would or should or not.

Raising the dead or walking on the water served a purpose at that time. Turning bread into flesh and wine into blood serves no useful purpose to anyone, and is not a Christian or biblical doctrine that He should.

Raising someone from the dead or walking on water were manifest miracles that could be observed as such. But we know that the bread is not turned into flesh, nor wine into blood, because we can eat and drink them and taste them, and take them to the laboratory and test them. It is a fake miracle if it is one.

zerinus

To become partakers of the Divine nature, not just spiritually, but physically.

Why else would all Christians believe this for the first 1500 years of Christianity, and why would christ do it, and then command his apostles and their successors to do it?

rediculous.

 

[zerinus]

Actually, there have been many scientific and archaeological expeditions and discoveries that have indicated that many Old Testament stories are true. This including the recent scientific discoveries that the genetic information in mitochondria in all human cells pointing to us coming from a common mother, such as Eve. I have not heard of any such proofs for Joseph Smith, although, I haven’t researched any either so, I am not well-versed in that side of things…

There are no archaeological or scientific evidence, nor indeed can there ever be, that can determine that the OT is the word of God; or that Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah etc were prophets of God; or that the miracles of the OT ever happened.

zerinus

 

[Ronald_E]

Jesus was a Jew, and he was raised as a religious Jew.

Therefore, he no doubt knew full well the very strong and very ancient command in the Torah that Jews are not to partake of ANY manner of blood, and no manner of human flesh.

That alone tells me he never meant to be taken literally, but most likely, figuratively.

Dear HashemEchad, It was meant to be understood spiritually. Literally and figuratively are terms related to human understanding. What we are asked to do is to relate to Him in the spirit (Holy Spirit) which He sent to us after His resurrection and is given to us in the sacraments beginning with Baptism. Then throught this first sacrament the Holy Spirit begins the process of developing an understanding in us that transcends the five senses.

 

[justinthemartyr]

where is the “case against transubstantiation” prior to the deformation period in the 16th century?

where is the cry of the people against it?

where is the evidence of anyone believing anything differetn, preaching anything different as a group, as a church?

hello???

 

[zerinus]

does God uses His own Spirit to contradicts Himself? if the Sacred Scriptures is a fable than your religion must be a fable too right? unless your religion is not based on the Sacred Scriptures of God the Creator. so here i ask again do you take the OT as true or not?

I take the OT as true. I take the NT as true. I take the Book of Mormon as true. I take the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price as true. I take all of them as true for the same reasons: the Holy Spirit witnesses to me that they are true. That is the only way that anyone could know that they are true.

zerinus

 

[J_C]

It is not a question of what I believe. It is a question of how do you determine the truth of something claiming to be a revelation from God. You ask, “Do I believe in the OT?” In answer I turn that question back to you again: How do you know that the OT is a revelation from God? How do you know that it is not a book of fables, as many people believe it is? How do you know that the miracles of Moses, or Joshua, or Elijah, or Elisha, or Daniel, or Isaiah, or Jeremiah ever happened? How do you know they are not fairy tales? The answer is that you don’t. You have no way of empirically and independently determining that they ever happened. You accept in faith that they did. The same is true for us about the miracles of Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants. We accept in faith that they are true, because the Spirit of the Lord witnesses to us that they are true.

zerinus

with all rspect i believe there is a fundamental flaw in your reasoning. you are unable to offer up very much “evidence” for the truth of your religion. usually you end up giving a personal testimony which can not be given any credance at all except what it means to you personally. then when you are pushed on that score you usually rspond in the way shown above in your post, which is to suggest that the mormon sect stands on equal footing with orthodox, ancient Christianity. and there is the flaw.

in no way can a religion which was born in 1830, founded by a single man, at odds in very many significannt ways from the orthododoxy it aims to replace, be on equal footing with that orthodoxy/. if mormonnism stands on equal ground with Christianity, then so does the Jehovahs sect, the moonies, the Branch Davidians, the FLDS, the SDA, tha Christian Scientistss, well I could go on. it is impossible to accord equal footing to all of these sects. They all claim some new, improved relvealtion, same as the LDS do. and each is opposed to the others. the main thing they all have in common is opposition to the original, one, holy, apostolic and Catholic Church.

i agree that there is no proof on any score. as yuou have said, if there were proof then there’d be no need for faith, and we all know that without faith it is impossible to please God. yet God doesn’t leave us without evidences. there are huge amounts of evidence for orthodox, Catholic Christianity. There are virtually no demonstarable evidences for mormonism.

so, you have the tie-in to the ancient faith. Cathlicism IS the ancient faith, and can be convincingly shown to be so. Catholicism and its separated brethren, the protestants and dare I say Orthodox, have direct, historical, theological connections to the ancient faith desscribed in the Bible. mormonism, on the other hand, is an 19th century innovation with very suspicious origins, and a history that makes it seem anything but Christian. if I were sitting on the fence right now, i don’t see how I could make a choice for mormonnism based on the evidence alone.

 

[Ronald_E]

Yes, but with a slight amendment:

Jesus [often] spoke in hyperbole
John 6:53-57 is [obviously] hyperbole
Therefore no transubstantiation

zerinus

Dear Zerinus, In John 6 Jesus tells that He speaks of the spirit and not the flesh. Hyperbole, figuratively, even literally are descriptions of understanding through the 5 senses. These do not apply when speaking of the spirit which He clearly states in John 6.

 

[Jimdandy]

Gnaw on this-the Spirit and the flesh of the resurrected Jesus are really and truly present in the Holy Eucharist.

The Spirit of Jesus is available to us if we but call His name.

The Spirit, Jesus and God are one and the same.

Call upon God, He will come and enlighten one.

Those that doubt-just ask God-then listen to His response.

No need to keep hashing this again and again and again.

God comes to all who ask-if they do so with a true and contrite heart

He also comes to those who do not believe when those that do believe pray for the unbelievers.

 

[J_C]

I take the OT as true. I take the NT as true. I take the Book of Mormon as true. I take the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price as true. I take all of them as true for the same reasons: the Holy Spirit witnesses to me that they are true. That is the only way that anyone could know that they are true.

zerinus

i would say that there is a difference between knowing something is true from a purely religious point of view, or knowing it is true from a factual point of view. undoubtedly there are many fundamental religious truths contained in the mormonn scriptures. these religious truths are universal, and are contained in the three great judeo derived religions. that sort of truth isn’t connected with the facts of archaeology, and whatnot.

i can certainly undersand that you receive a witness of this spritual truth from your scriptures. But the factual truths can’t be proven from this same source. your religion places great emphasis on the “facts” of things for which there is little or no evidence whatever, while Christian spiritual truths have many connections to historical and archaeological, and other information.

the evidence is hugely in favor of orthodox christianity and by virtue of that, hugely against any sect standing in opposition to it.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I take the OT as true. I take the NT as true. I take the Book of Mormon as true. I take the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price as true. I take all of them as true for the same reasons: the Holy Spirit witnesses to me that they are true. That is the only way that anyone could know that they are true.

zerinus

now, you claim inspiration from the Holy Ghost, so does, protestants, catholics, muslims and others. they all claim to hold the truth. how do you know you have the truth?

 

[zerinus]

with all rspect i believe there is a fundamental flaw in your reasoning. you are unable to offer up very much “evidence” for the truth of your religion. usually you end up giving a personal testimony which can not be given any credance at all except what it means to you personally. then when you are pushed on that score you usually rspond in the way shown above in your post, which is to suggest that the mormon sect stands on equal footing with orthodox, ancient Christianity. and there is the flaw.

in no way can a religion which was born in 1830, founded by a single man, at odds in very many significannt ways from the orthododoxy it aims to replace, be on equal footing with that orthodoxy/. if mormonnism stands on equal ground with Christianity, then so does the Jehovahs sect, the moonies, the Branch Davidians, the FLDS, the SDA, tha Christian Scientistss, well I could go on. it is impossible to accord equal footing to all of these sects. They all claim some new, improved relvealtion, same as the LDS do. and each is opposed to the others. the main thing they all have in common is opposition to the original, one, holy, apostolic and Catholic Church.

i agree that there is no proof on any score. as yuou have said, if there were proof then there’d be no need for faith, and we all know that without faith it is impossible to please God. yet God doesn’t leave us without evidences. there are huge amounts of evidence for orthodox, Catholic Christianity. There are virtually no demonstarable evidences for mormonism.

so, you have the tie-in to the ancient faith. Cathlicism IS the ancient faith, and can be convincingly shown to be so. Catholicism and its separated brethren, the protestants and dare I say Orthodox, have direct, historical, theological connections to the ancient faith desscribed in the Bible. mormonism, on the other hand, is an 19th century innovation with very suspicious origins, and a history that makes it seem anything but Christian. if I were sitting on the fence right now, i don’t see how I could make a choice for mormonnism based on the evidence alone.

We never claim to provide “evidence” for the truth of Mormonism, except the testimony of the Holy Ghost. If you believe that you have more convincing “evidence” for the truth of your own religion, then you are welcome to it. Mormonism is not for you. There are those, however, who find the testimony we bear more convincing than the kind of “evidence” you offer them. Our message is intended for them.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Dear Zerinus, In John 6 Jesus tells that He speaks of the spirit and not the flesh. Hyperbole, figuratively, even literally are descriptions of understanding through the 5 senses. These do not apply when speaking of the spirit which He clearly states in John 6.

Hyperbole is a form of exageration for effect or emphasis. John 6 is a chapter, not a verse; not all of it is hyperbole. John 6:53-57 is what we were talking about here, and that is a good example of hyperbole.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

i would say that there is a difference between knowing something is true from a purely religious point of view, or knowing it is true from a factual point of view. undoubtedly there are many fundamental religious truths contained in the mormonn scriptures. these religious truths are universal, and are contained in the three great judeo derived religions. that sort of truth isn’t connected with the facts of archaeology, and whatnot.

i can certainly undersand that you receive a witness of this spritual truth from your scriptures. But the factual truths can’t be proven from this same source. your religion places great emphasis on the “facts” of things for which there is little or no evidence whatever, while Christian spiritual truths have many connections to historical and archaeological, and other information.

the evidence is hugely in favor of orthodox christianity and by virtue of that, hugely against any sect standing in opposition to it.

See my reply to your previous post.

zerinus

 

[po18guy]

You’re forgetting something that the 1st century Jews would understand at the time Christ spoke those words in John 6. They saw this in the context of the foretelling of the Messiah as outlined in the Old Testament.

When Christ said that he was to be “eaten” this goes back to Jewish sacrificial practices outlined in Exodus, with Christ being the “sacrifice,” the paschal lamb. Read Exodus and Leviticus again to see the correlation before you come to your conclusion.

The Paschal lamb (a male without blemish) had to be eaten in the Passover meal. John the Baptist, upon seeing Christ, proclaimed “Behold the Lamb of God”. Christ, in John 6, used the Greek for “chew” or “gnaw” as the verb in eating his flesh. Cognition, as is alleged by some, had nothing to do with chewing or gnawing. The only case against Christ in the Eucharist is disbelief. It appears in many forms, but it remains disbelief. And, anyone is absolutely free to believe or disbelieve. We argue only the wisdom of disbelief.

Christ’s peace.

 

[wisdomseeker]

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerinus
I take the OT as true. I take the NT as true. I take the Book of Mormon as true. I take the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price as true. I take all of them as true for the same reasons: the Holy Spirit witnesses to me that they are true. That is the only way that anyone could know that they are true.

zerinus

now, you claim inspiration from the Holy Ghost, so does, protestants, catholics, muslims and others. they all claim to hold the truth. how do you know you have the truth?

 

[zerinus]

now, you claim inspiration from the Holy Ghost, so does, protestants, catholics, muslims and others.

Actually, they don’t. I have never heard Protestants, Catholics, Moslems, JWs, or any other religious group seeking to convert people on the basis of the testimony of the Holy Ghost, obtained by the sincere prayer of faith. The Book of Mormon, on the other hand, is the only book I know that contains within it the promise that if you study it sincerely, and pray about it in faith, God will reveal the truth of it to you by the power of the Holy Ghost.

they all claim to hold the truth. how do you know you have the truth?

By the testimony of the Holy Ghost.

zerinus

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

John 6:[27] Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you; for on him has God the Father set his seal."

John 6:55 “For my Flesh is true food, and my Blood is true drink.”

John 6:[54] “he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”

So if it is just “superstition” how do you explain these passages from John 6?

What does Jesus mean when He says to “LABOR” for the food that leads to eternal life which He will give us?

What does Jesus mean when He says that His FLESH is true food and that whoever eats this food-eats His flesh-will have eternal life?

 

[wisdomseeker]

Actually, they don’t. I have never heard Protestants, Catholics, Moslems, JWs, or any other religious group seeking to convert people on the basis of the testimony of the Holy Ghost, obtained by the sincere prayer of faith. The Book of Mormon, on the other hand, is the only book I know that contains within it the promise that if you study it sincerely, and pray about it in faith, God will reveal the truth of it to you by the power of the Holy Ghost.

By the testimony of the Holy Ghost.

zerinus

that is you saying is it not? obviously i could tell the same that i have the testimony of the Holy Ghost, could i not? like many others do the same. the protestants claim the same thing. they say each one of them are inspired by the Holy Ghost to interpret Scriptures? unless you dont know much about these religions or even listen to them. is it not true that Jesus said that the HG would lead the apostles into all truth?

 

[J_C]

Actually, they don’t. ***I have never heard ***Protestants, Catholics, Moslems, JWs, or any other religious group seeking to convert people on the basis of the testimony of the Holy Ghost, obtained by the sincere prayer of faith.

then you have never heard, but that doesn’t mean an appeal to the inner voice of God is not made. God does speak to our hearts, in that still small voice. i have led a few to faith, and have always asked them to pray, read the scriptures, and listen to God speak in the quiet of contemplation.

the apparentl difference between us is that mormons get revelation about factual things, such as history, archaeology, and the like, while orthodox Christians get gentle leadings into the moral truths of God’s word. We would never depend upon personal revelation for new doctrinal things, but we would depend upon it to confirm that the doctrines of the Church are true and to be obeyed. factual things, such as the structure of the universe, or whetther it is true that the American natives come from Palestine, would not, we believe, be revealed directly by God.