The Eucharist is NOT the body of Christ

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajk19
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
HailMary said:
BORING!

AJK19, please, if you have enough courage, answer my post below!

John 6:67
After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him

Christ gave them no explanation. He did not say, “wait, you mis-understood me, I was only speaking figuratively”. They knew, along with everyone else, exactly what He was saying?

If this were figurative, why is it written?

61 Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it.

Whats so hard about figuratively seeing Jesus as the Bread of Life? Whats so different about Jesus being the Vine, or the Light, or the Good Shepard? Why didn’t anyone else leave him there? THINK!

WHY IS THIS SAYING HARD? WHAT MAKES IT SO DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER SAYING? BEFORE YOU CAN ASSERT SOMETHING AS HERETICAL AS DENYING THE REAL PRESENCE OF THE EUCHARIST, YOU WOULD NEED TO ANSWER THAT BASIC QUESTION.
Click to expand...
Why is it so hard? Simple. Jesus was basically saying to them that they’d need to be willing to sacrifice and suffer on Earth as Jesus himself did in order to truly follow Him and be one with Him. Obviously that is not an easy thing to accept for anybody, and so many said it was too hard and left Him.

As to why he didn’t call them back? They had made their decision, and he wasn’t going to force them to come back. If they were to comeback they would have to decide to themselves.
 
ajk19 said:
Maybe there wasn’t then, I don’t really know. But his death was enough to save us from all sin and redeem us, resurrection or not.
Click to expand...
1 Corinthians 15:12 (and on):
12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.
Click to expand...
20But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
Click to expand...
The resurrection is indeed necessary.
 
ajk19 said:
It is possible that Satan can use “miracles” such as these and others to deceive and make you believe that really isn’t true, in fact is. He can make anything look good, even when it’s not.
Click to expand...
So you’re saying, basically, that the Church throughout history - from the earliest writings of the Fathers - has been deceived by Satan into believing in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

This is not some late doctrine. You can find it not only in the biblical passages we have mentioned, but also very explicitly in the writings of early 2nd century martyr, St. Ignatius (Bishop of Antioch), who was mauled to death by lions in the arena. St. Ignatius died in 107 AD. His martyrdom helped spread Christianity.

St. Ignatius was a student of the Apostle John, who wrote the passages we’ve been discussing. So, are you saying that St. Ignatius - glorious martyr and defender of the faith - didn’t have a clue on the Eucharist? Or that he was deceived by Satan?
 
ajk19 said:
I would say that to be the case yes.
Click to expand...
Following your line of “reasoning” then…
The whole of Christian history has been one big lie, and no one knows the Truth, therefore any and all study of Christianity is pointless. Thus, your search for truth is pointless because it does not exist because Christianity has been duped by Satan.

Nice 👍

Even when I was Pagan, I wouldn’t have believed all of that. Every pagan I know wouldn’t have believed it either. You are a wonder.
 
PatienceAndLove said:
Following your line of “reasoning” then…
The whole of Christian history has been one big lie, and no one knows the Truth, therefore any and all study of Christianity is pointless. Thus, your search for truth is pointless because it does not exist because Christianity has been duped by Satan.

Nice 👍

Even when I was Pagan, I wouldn’t have believed all of that. Every pagan I know wouldn’t have believed it either. You are a wonder.
Click to expand...
No not all of Christian history, just the Catholic Church.
 
ajk19 said:
No not all of Christian history, just the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
The great deceiver has insinuated himself well into your heart, mind and soul.

Such a ridiculous statement surely has cost you any serious consideration by any serious Christian.

May our Blessed Mother intercede on your behalf, and request that he replace your heart of stone with one of flesh. The King will never refuse a request by his Gebirah.

Noone expects you to be Catholic. Only decent, respectful and accurate.

Merry Christmas. May He be born into your soul.
 
ajk19 said:
No not all of Christian history, just the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
ajk19 said:
Testing it against Scripture.
Click to expand...
Then how do you explain the fact that some Protestant churches believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist and others do not? After all, every Christian church, Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox uses the same New Testament. How do you explain the difference? How do you determine who is right?
 
maurin said:
The great deceiver has insinuated himself well into your heart, mind and soul.
Click to expand...
I think it’s the other way around.
Such a ridiculous statement surely has cost you any serious consideration by any serious Christian.
Click to expand...
Catholics perhaps, but Christians that have the knowledge I have, no.
May our Blessed Mother intercede on your behalf, and request that he replace your heart of stone with one of flesh. The King will never refuse a request by his Gebirah.
Click to expand...
Don’t think I need it, besides there is no need for an intercessor to start with anyway.
Merry Christmas. May He be born into your soul.
Click to expand...
I wish you the very same.
 
lak611 said:
Then how do you explain the fact that some Protestant churches believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist and others do not? After all, every Christian church, Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox uses the same New Testament. How do you explain the difference? How do you determine who is right?
Click to expand...
Again testing it by scripture. Any church that believes in the Real Presence, Catholic or not is just plain wrong.
 
ajk19 said:
Again testing it by scripture. Any church that believes in the Real Presence, Catholic or not is just plain wrong.
Click to expand...
So you believe in following a man, Zwingli, rather than God.
Some Protestant groups see Communion (also called the Lord’s Supper or the Lord’s Table) as merely a symbolic meal, a basic memorial of the Last Supper and the Passion, which is done by the ordinance of Jesus, but in which nothing miraculous occurs. This view is known as the Zwinglian view, after Huldrych Zwingli, a Swiss leader during the Reformation.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Presence
 
ajk19 said:
No I believe in following God, and God was not speaking literally as far as his body and blood goes. To think that he was is to be deceived.
Click to expand...
Was Jesus a liar when He said “This is My Body”?
 
Again he was not speaking literally, I’m not calling Him a liar, but simply saying you and others have misinterpreted Him. He was using the bread and wine, as a means to symbolize what he was about to do, that is die on the cross for all.
 
ajk19 said:
Again he was not speaking literally, I’m not calling Him a liar, but simply saying you and others have misinterpreted Him. He was using the bread and wine, as a means to symbolize what he was about to do, that is die on the cross for all.
Click to expand...
What is your evidence that this was symbolic? We have quoted other Scripture and Early Church Fathers who disagree with your interpretation. I also gave you a link that shows that many Protestant denominations believe in the Real Presence. Where is your proof that all of these sources are wrong and you are right?
 
I have already explained my reasons. As for what Church Fathers say, doesn’t mean anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top