I’m not too sure from this post whether you are confirming of denying the Catholic position.
- Status
R
revelations
Guest
Didnt the scripture come after the belief of the real presence? Like, going back to 100 AD, didn’t they truly believe in the real presence?
So, you have to ask yourself, if they believed in the real presence before they brought the scripture together, the context of the scripture is based on the real presence?
Which to me is all the reason you need to prove this. Does this make sense>?
So, you have to ask yourself, if they believed in the real presence before they brought the scripture together, the context of the scripture is based on the real presence?
Which to me is all the reason you need to prove this. Does this make sense>?
C
Cling2Cross
Guest
Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.What did Jesus say?
I believe Jesus. That’s why I became a Catholic.
1Corinthians 11:24 And 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. {in…: or, for a remembrance}
1Corinthians 11:25 After 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.
(KJV)
This does not quite hit on the idea that you will have no life in you. And besides, if this is the case, nobody can be saved outside of the CC. Does this line in the CC agree?
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day."330
In accordance with the scriptures they have no life in them.
Just to say this, they do not worship the same God…their God is not the Triune God of Scripture. Also, Christ is God (the Son) and they (Mulsims) claim He is not God - they do not even claim that Christ died on the cross. So, they DO NOT worship the same God…they worship a FALSE GOD.
J
jmcrae
Guest
J
justasking4
Guest
If what you say is true this means that when Jesus first spoke these words at the supper He had no longer just a human body that the apostles saw and touched but that He has another body of bread and wine. Are you willing to believe this?
J
jmcrae
Guest
He is using the same word that they used for the Passover Lamb in the ritual of the Passover. You could not be considered Jewish if you did not participate in the Passover by eating of the lamb, even though your ancestors had been rescued from slavery centuries before. The point of the Passover ritual was that they were not personally rescued from spiritual slavery until they ate the meat of the Passover Lamb.
Jesus is our Passover Lamb. We must personally eat of Him (in a state of grace, and as members of the Catholic Church, of course), in order to be rescued from our spiritual slavery.
“Outside the Church, there is no salvation.” This is a doctrine of the faith, yes.
Muslims (like Protestants and Jews) can convert, yes - even on their death-bed. They can become saved. They are not saved yet in their current condition, but they are not without hope. They, too, can some day become Catholics, and become saved. There are no non-Catholics in Heaven, but there will be Catholics who used to be something else, including Muslim, Protestant, etc.
The rest is off-topic - we have many topics on the possibility of salvation for the Muslims, or at least we used to. Do a search and you will most likely find them.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
Also, look at the Greek, the language it was written in. Two verbs are used:
φαγον [phagon] - to eat (the normal verb used)
τρώγων [trogon] - to chew, gnaw, as an animal does
(I believe I spelled them write in the Greek alphabet, but a letter or two may be off
)
(Also note, I am only using the names I gave above - I am not conjugating them (I’m not sure if those are the infinitives or what tense and person they are conjugated for) - to see them properly conjugated, see here.)
John 6:49-58:
49: Your ancestors ate [phagon] the manna in the desert, but they died;
50: this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat [phagon] it and not die.
51: I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats [phagon] this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world."
52: The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat [phagon]?”
53: Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat [phagon] the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54: Whoever eats [trogon] my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55: For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56: Whoever eats [trogon] my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
57: Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds [trogon] on me will have life because of me.
58: This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate [phagon] and still died, whoever eats [trogon] this bread will live forever."
Notice that when the Jews start doubting Jesus, He becomes much more insistent in His language. Not just eating, but chewing, gnawing, devouring the flesh. Not the language of metaphor or symbolism.
Also, look at the Greek, the language it was written in. Two verbs are used:
φαγον [phagon] - to eat (the normal verb used)
τρώγων [trogon] - to chew, gnaw, as an animal does
(I believe I spelled them write in the Greek alphabet, but a letter or two may be off
)(Also note, I am only using the names I gave above - I am not conjugating them (I’m not sure if those are the infinitives or what tense and person they are conjugated for) - to see them properly conjugated, see here.)
John 6:49-58:
49: Your ancestors ate [phagon] the manna in the desert, but they died;
50: this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat [phagon] it and not die.
51: I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats [phagon] this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world."
52: The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat [phagon]?”
53: Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat [phagon] the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54: Whoever eats [trogon] my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55: For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56: Whoever eats [trogon] my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
57: Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds [trogon] on me will have life because of me.
58: This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate [phagon] and still died, whoever eats [trogon] this bread will live forever."
Notice that when the Jews start doubting Jesus, He becomes much more insistent in His language. Not just eating, but chewing, gnawing, devouring the flesh. Not the language of metaphor or symbolism.
Interesting point you bring up. The word “remembrance” in Greek is “anamnesis”, a rarely-used word. Anamnesis in Greek is the counterpart of the Hebrew zikkaron, and does not cover our mere mental recall. Zikkaron or anamnesis has always referred to a sacrificial form of memory, in which the event being recalled is not just in the minds of the people, but is actually made present; that is, they actually participate in the event being recalled. A reading of Hebrews and Revelation shows just how this is possible.
Anamnesis or zikkaron are not elegantly translatable into English. Memory or remembrance or commemoration are the closest terms, but they do not convey the force of the original words.
That’s right. They don’t.
All the Catechism says is that they figure into the plan of salvation. It also just says that they profess to worship the same God, and they probably do, just as the Jews do, who also do not acknowledge Christ as divine. Yet we do not accuse the Jews of worshiping a different god. It does not say that Muslims will be saved. Rather, God in his mercy is able to lead even Muslims to Christ, since he desires not the death of any man.
But if a Muslim, having known that Christ alone is the savior, yet refuses to leave his false religion, is almost certainly damned,
Finally, we never know the disposition of any person’s last moment of life. God is just, but God is also merciful. It is what allows us to hope. But the Church firmly teaches this. If a Muslim gets saved, it was only through Christ that it happened.
I suggest you do not continue the Muslim issue on this thread, start a new one if necessary.
J
justasking4
Guest
J
justasking4
Guest
What characteristics of God does the eucharist have?
No we do not believe this. Jesus had only one body, not two, otherwise, there would be two Jesuses. No, the Body he held in his hands was his same human body. Just as we believe that the Bread on the altar today is the very same Body that is in heaven. But he never leaves heaven.
How is this possible? Beats me. But he is God, and is able to be in two places at once, even under different forms. All I know is that he said: “This is my Body.” And since he is the Truth, we believe. How it works, well, only he knows.
J
jmcrae
Guest
“This is my body,” “This is my blood,” - the same God who said, “Let there be light” (literally: here is light) and there was light - Jesus is the Word that spoke the light into existence with the word “is.” When Jesus the Word of God says the word “is”, God’s Creation is taking place.
It explains in the Book of Leviticus, what a “sacrifice” is, and what the priests and the people are supposed to do with it.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
Characteristics? It is His very essence - Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ.
L
lak611
Guest
From Strong’s Concordance:
Gnawing or chewing means to literally eat.
E
EphelDuath
Guest
If you’re asking if I believe in miracles, then yes I do. It’s part of the package.
The most important teaching of Christ was the Eucharist. If you’re going to toss that out the window because it’s too difficult for you to grasp, might as well throw out the “dying for our sins” clause as well.
Therefore, Jews also worship a false god, since they claim Christ was either a fictional invention or a liar. Therefore, Jesus is a demon for attempting to get you to worship a false god as well.
Man, I hate it when people throw this jazz in the air. Like everything has to be so black-and-white or else your faith is in jeopardy.
Look: Muslims worship the same God, but in the wrong way. They’ve been lead astray. Yes, they’re in apostasy. Yes, they’re heretics. Call them whatever you like, but when you try to demonize them for being in the wrong, then you’ve demonized the Lord as well.
S
Sabda
Guest
Right, Jesus said to “do this”. So the apostles “did this” and passed “this” on to their disclipes who passed “this” on and on and on. What was “this”? The Mass! Look at Luke 24:
13Now that very day two of them were going to a village seven miles from Jerusalem called Emmaus,
14and they were conversing about all the things that had occurred.
**15And it happened that while they were conversing and debating, Jesus himself drew near and walked with them,
16but their eyes were prevented from recognizing him. **
17He asked them, “What are you discussing as you walk along?” They stopped, looking downcast.
18One of them, named Cleopas, said to him in reply, “Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know of the things that have taken place there in these days?”
19And he replied to them, “What sort of things?” They said to him, “The things that happened to Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people,
20how our chief priests and rulers both handed him over to a sentence of death and crucified him.
21But we were hoping that he would be the one to redeem Israel; and besides all this, it is now the third day since this took place.
22Some women from our group, however, have astounded us: they were at the tomb early in the morning
23and did not find his body; they came back and reported that they had indeed seen a vision of angels who announced that he was alive.
24Then some of those with us went to the tomb and found things just as the women had described, but him they did not see.”
25And he said to them, “Oh, how foolish you are! How slow of heart to believe all that the prophets spoke!
26Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer 8 these things and enter into his glory?”
27Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them what referred to him in all the scriptures.
28As they approached the village to which they were going, he gave the impression that he was going on farther.
29But they urged him, “Stay with us, for it is nearly evening and the day is almost over.” So he went in to stay with them.
**30And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them.
31With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight. **32Then they said to each other, “Were not our hearts burning (within us) while he spoke to us on the way and opened the scriptures to us?”
We have the Scripture readings, which are the first part of the Mass and then we have the “breaking of the bread”, the Eucharist. If you pay attention to the words you will notice it says “he vanished from their sight” but was he really gone? It doesn’t say he left, just that he vanished from their sight. Also, why was it that they did not recognize him until he “broke the bread”? What was so special about that?
This has absolutely nothing to do with this thread. Keep in mind the Jews do not recognize Jesus Christ as the Messiah and they also do not worship God in His Truine form either. Please, start a new thread on this topic.
J
justasking4
Guest
Since Jesus is the God-man we believe He was God because of what He did i.e. miracles. He also had intelligence and power.
When a person spoke to Him, He responded.
Now, does the eucharist have power that can be demonstrated?
Can it perform miracles for example?
Can it verbally communicate with you?
S
Sabda
Guest
justasking4;3102579:
1 Corthinians 5:
not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
This is a clearly links Jesus to the Passover feast. What were you required to eat at the Passover? The sacrificial lamb.
G
guanophore
Guest
To understand the meaning of this passage correctly, one must look back to the memorial meal from whence it came. The Passover meal was to be shared as an experience and literally eaten. It had to be completely consumed. In the Passover, the ceremonial parts recalled the deliverance of God. One must take this passage in it’s context as a Passover Meal. If one is not part of the covenant, one is not saved.
There is only one Church. Jesus did not establish “churches”. All who are members of His body are members of the one church.
Jesus saves, and outside of Him, there is no salvation. He is One with His Church.
God can save whoever He wants, however He pleases. All who are saved are part of His Bride.
They worship the same God, though they do not know Him as He has fully revealed Himself. They worship the God of Abraham, as do the Jews. The Jews do not accept the full revelation of God either.
They do not recognize the Trinity, they only recognize the Father. As Jesus tells the Samaritans “you worship what you do not know”. Perhaps God has a plan to reveal Himself to them.
I am not prepared to limit God in the way you are. I don’t claim to understand the mystery that is represented here, but I accept what Jesus said because that is the living faith that has been handed down to us through the Apostolic Succession. This is part of Sacred Tradition, which you consider to be nothing more than the erroneous “speculations of men”, and therefore, invalid. Are you willing to believe that Jesus did not really mean what He said?
- Status