The Eucharist: Real Presence or symbol?

[joe370]

Let me ask you a question first…which do you think came first…the Catholic priests celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass or, in particular, the NT?

Definitely the Catholic priests celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Interesting point.

 

[Nicea325]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
Exactly so familiar the non-believers (as you are) said:

“How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
“This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”
From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.
Why so much fuss over a SYMBOL?

Jesus often spoke in parables to veil His meaning. This was a particularly difficult one given Jewish law and the consumption of flesh and blood. If you actually read the entire chapter you’ll see that Jesus starts this portion telling the crowd that the work of the Father is to believe Him.

Exactly! And did he not clarify himself,if they did not understand? Again,if it is ONLY a symbol and another parable,rather strange Jesus does not clear it up?

Jesus then said that if you eat of this bread you will not go hungry. Where is the literalism? Do Catholics ever hunger? Of course they do, this is like Jesus words to the woman at the well, and water/thirst.

Presciely…You have no life in you,unless you EAT MY FLESH & DRINK BLOOD! One more time, he did not say: Eat these symbols of my body and blood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
Well no offense,but you ‘think’ and what God said differ vastly. Jesus said: “DO THIS…”…not pick and choose.

Right. The question is what did He say to do?

Again…EAT MY FLESH & DRINK MY BLOOD. How many times I do need to repeat Jesus’ own words and command?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
Wow! So you being a mere mortal creature question God with: “Where can his…” Do question His incarnation? Again,your carnal knowledge hinders you greatly. One more time, God has no limits. ?

So God can not exist if He wants. God can lie.

God can lie? Wow! A mere mortal basically knowing what THE OMNIPOTENT God can and cannot do? Amazing!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
And it certainly is NOT an argument against it either. ?

It’s not an argument for it, and I have just posted one against it.

And not against it and I gave you one against your symbolic novelty. By the way, show me the overwhelming writings from the ECF’s condemning the Real Presence as a heresy and usurpation from Christ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
That Origen believes in the RP as just gave you reference to it. If it is only a symbol as you believe where are his writings condemning the RP as a heresy or usurpation from Christ? ?

This wasn’t an official doctrine of the church yet. Sure it was believed by some, but this notion of ‘transubstantiation’ hit the books about 1000 years later, then an anathema added as a big ‘gotcha’ to Luther at the Council of Trent.

What is the matter? Did I corner you? Show me his writings and the other ECF’s condemning the Real Presence as a heresy? Excuse me? Believed by ‘some’ Christians? Precisely why I am asking you to show me the vast writings against the Real Presence? Official doctrine? Simply because a doctrine is defined and declared at certain point in time does not make it false. The Trinity and Incarnation were defined and declared in the 4th century. Should we question those two beliefs as well?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
If He is the foundation of TRUTH,then why cannot He gives His literal Flesh and Blood?

He can, absolutely. I just think He gave us a means to commemorate His flesh and blood with real food and real drink.

And he did,but your spiritual pride gets in the way to accept it. Protestants who teach a symbolic Eucharist are like the Jews who could not understand and accept that specific teaching from Christ.

End result: Walked away…YOUR LOSS!

 

[joe370]

Hi Radical…

Radical;7667560]it is not merely a right that should be recognized, but rather each side should actually recognize that sound arguments exist in opposition to their own views. (obviously not convincing to all, but at least sound).

Agreed.

a) did God provide his church with an infallible teaching authority?

If infallible means that the holy spirit is guiding Jesus’ church into all truth, as per scripture, then I agree with a.

b) if so, does that infallible teaching authority continue until this day?

John 14:16 and Matthew 28:20 says yes.

c) if so, is that infallible teaching authority found in the CC?

Not if the CC is not the church of Matthew 16, John14:16, John 16:13 and Matthew 28:20 and Acts 1:8; yes if the CC is.

After my fallible mind answered those questions all in the affirmative I could then, like you, claim that I can know with certainty the truth regarding the Eucharist by looking to the infallible teaching authority found in the CC…

OK…

but if I am to be completely honest, I would have to acknowledge that, at its root, my knowledge is still founded on the conclusion of my fallible mind at (a), (b) and (c) and b/c my mind is ** fallible**, I would have to admit there is a possibility that I erred in answering (a), (b) and (c). If I possibly erred WRT (a), (b) and (c), then I must acknowledge that my certainty regarding the truth of the CC’s Eucharist may also be in error. One can’t achieve a perfectly infallible knowledge and still be human, unless one is also fully God…it ain’t gonna happen for us.

I agree with that logic, and that same logic applies to me as well. If I possibly erred WRT (a), (b) and (c), then I must acknowledge that my certainty regarding the truth of the CC’s Eucharist **may also be in error. **

Based on your logic, you and I cannot be certain that we are right and therefore both of us can honestly say that Jesus did not leave you and I with a way to know, with certainty, the truth regarding the Eucharist, which brings me back to my original question:

Did Jesus leave His church (as opposed to you and I) - with a way to know, with certainty, the truth regarding the Eucharist?

 

[Nicea325]

Hello wisdomseeker,

Well the apostle Paul say, in 2 Timothy 3:16-17:
16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Jeremiah 19:13 states: And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart.

Jesus himself states in Matthew 7:Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you

Who do we look to? John 16:13 says:
Howbeit 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.

I think it is clear that the Holy Spirit guides his people into all Truth as we study the Word.

Yeah and the Apostle did not say: ONLY scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

These verses have been taken so out-of-context for so long that it is rather sad.

The Holy Spirit guides his people? Hhmmm? How many THOUSANDS & THOUSANDS of denominations? How many ‘truths’ are out there?

 

[rinnie]

Peter was teaching one thing and Paul called him on it. Authority is all over the place.

You continue to say this, could you show us the false Teaching you are accusing Peter of teaching?

 

[rinnie]

Thanks Fred, I agree that on it’s face it is a nice idea. But Jesus Himself also said two things: “The flesh profits nothing” and “what goes into the mouth goes out of the body.”

So the idea of a physical presence is abhorrent to me. I’ll pray about it, of course.

The funny thing is, I am perfectly willing to accept a ‘spiritual presence’ of Christ in the Eucharist. And this seems to fit better our lack of perceiving Him with our senses, etc.

I think Christ wanted us to trust our senses somewhat, otherwise He wouldn’t have performed miracles, nor had a BODILY resurrection, allowed His disciples to TOUCH His wounds, etc.

This sounds like gnosticism to me, not much like good doctrine. But I appreciate your candor and your viewpoint on it.

Oh Man, this is really messed up. Are you trying compare the Body of Christ with the disbelief of the Pharisees.

Jesus is not talking about his Body, he is leading his disciples away from the teaching authority of the Pharisees.

Please go back to the teaching of Matt. 15:13. What do you think that every plant that my Heavely Father HAS NOT PLANTED will be uprooted means? Trust me the Eucharist is not to be unrooted. It was indeed planted by the Father in Heaven.

Jesus was telling his Apostles that the Pharisees are blind to the teachings of God, he said they are the blind leading the blind and they will fall into a pit. Can you not see that Jesus was showing they had no authority. The he was the one who has the authority to teach!

 

[rinnie]

Ah, thats Ok Jh, because he could not show it anyway!

 

[Nicea325]

Ah, thats Ok Jh, because he could not show it anyway!

One does not really need to get into extensive discussions in regards to the Real Presence of the Eucharist. It is easily refuted with history. I asked David Y to present the vast writings from the ECF’s condemning the Real Presence as a heresy or usurpation from Christ. Has he? Nope! And never will because a symbolic eucharist is a noveltly…end of discussion!

 

[Radical]

Hi Radical…

I agree with that logic, and that same logic applies to me as well. If I possibly erred WRT (a), (b) and (c), then I must acknowledge that my certainty regarding the truth of the CC’s Eucharist **may also be in error. **

Based on your logic, you and I cannot be certain that we are right and therefore both of us can honestly say that Jesus did not leave you and I with a way to know, with certainty, the truth regarding the Eucharist, which brings me back to my original question:

Did Jesus leave His church (as opposed to you and I) - with a way to know, with certainty, the truth regarding the Eucharist?

well it seems that we agree that it can’t be achieved individually…and so given that limitation, I don’t know how it would be achieved collectively

 

[joe370]

well it seems that we agree that it can’t be achieved individually…and so given that limitation, I don’t know how it would be achieved collectively

So your answer is: I don’t know? Fair enough!

 

[NA77]

Let me ask you a question first…which do you think came first…the Catholic priests celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass or, in particular, the NT?

Hello pablope,

Well, in the early Church was there a distinction between New Testament and Old Testament? The scriptures included everything inspired by the Holy Spirit (the Old Testament as we know it today). Even the apostle Peter references the apostle Paul’s writings as scipture (see 2 Peter 3:15-16). So even though it was not labeled tas the NT, the scriptures came first.

 

[NA77]

Jesus said, If you have a problem with you brother, take to the Church. If he doesnt listen to the Church, treat him as an anathema. my question is, Which Church should we go to resolve our dissagreements? Jesus built One Church not many churches. so, what is your answer?

I know those passages are in Sacred Scritures. they are teachings of the CC. before your congregation ever existed, the Church has been teaching this for 2000 yrs. so, you are actually kind of late.

Hello wisdomseeker,

To keep this conversation relevant to this thread, I would agree that in order to participate in the ordinance of communion, a person must be reconciled to his brother prior to partaking, hence the ordinance of footwashing as a symbol of humility.

That being said, if the current Church you are in follows the Biblical method of reconciliation, go to that Church for those issues. Since you mentioned my congregation, I’ll give you a nutshell explanation of why, although my congregation is late on the scenes, it is relevant today.

I believe that the days we’re living in are the last days. I have reached this conclusion based on prophecy from the Bible. Don’t ask how many days we have left, because know man knows that, however, in the book of Revelation 14:12 it says,

Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

This is simply food for thought, since this topic would need to be discussed elsewhere. Which commandments are meant in the previous verse? If we search the New Testament it becomes obvious that it is ten commandments. These would be the ten commandments as expressed in Exodus 20. Since the church is comprised of saints, which church keeps these commandments today. This is a rhetorical question, but since you asked…
I believe the Seventh Day Adventist Church is the only church currently following the commandments and calling others to come out of Babylon (be that secular or religious) to follow God in these last days.

May the Lord bless you.

 

[Radical]

So your answer is: I don’t know? Fair enough!

actually my answer would be that Jesus did not leave His church (those who possess the Spirit)) - with a way to know, with perfect certainty, the truth regarding the Eucharist…if it can’t be achieved individually, then it can’t be achieved collectively.

 

[Nicea325]

Hello pablope,

Well, in the early Church was there a distinction between New Testament and Old Testament? The scriptures included everything inspired by the Holy Spirit (the Old Testament as we know it today). Even the apostle Peter references the apostle Paul’s writings as scipture (see 2 Peter 3:15-16). So even though it was not labeled tas the NT, the scriptures came first.

False premise. Jeus found His Church-FIRST, not NT writings. Not a single writing of the NT was penned until 20-25 years after Christ Ascension into glory. Secondly,the fact Peter mentions Paul’s writings as scripture is not proof scripture came first because the Bible is very clear Jesus founded His Church. Third, of course Paul’s writings were considered scriptrue, he was an Apostle. Last,but there existed hundreds and hundreds of writings and determination of what constituted scripture was not compiled into one volume (The Bible) 300+ years after Christ death.

 

[Nicea325]

I believe the Seventh Day Adventist Church is the only church currently following the commandments and calling others to come out of Babylon (be that secular or religious) to follow God in these last days.

Oh really? The ONLY Church following God’s commandments? Chapter and verse where God commanded people like Ellen G White and countless of others to found their own churches? I am very anxious to read that commandment from God,since you believe the SDA is the ONLY church following God’s commandments.

 

[NA77]

Yeah and the Apostle did not say: ONLY scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

These verses have been taken so out-of-context for so long that it is rather sad.

The Holy Spirit guides his people? Hhmmm? How many THOUSANDS & THOUSANDS of denominations? How many ‘truths’ are out there?

Hello Nicea325,

No you are correct, prophets are inspired by the Holy Spirit as well to communicate God’s word. However, the apostle Peter says in 2 Peter 1:19,
We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

As the Bible states in Psalm 119:105, Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

Clearly the Word of God is the light we live by and which equips us. What other inspired writings by the Holy Spirit are there? We must remember the warning in Revelation 22:18-19: For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Although this passage is specifically talking about the book of Revelation, do you think God would take lightly adding or deleting from other parts of His revealed Truth?

In regards to the many denominations, no doubt many ravenous wolves have come in not sparing the flock (Acts 20:29) and Jesus said if possible even the very elect would be deceived (Matthew 24:24). I believe so many deceptions have entered among the Christian faith, hence the multitude of teachings taking people away from the Bible and Jesus. No Holy Spirit guidance there unfortunately.

 

[pablope]

Hello pablope,

Well, in the early Church was there a distinction between New Testament and Old Testament? The scriptures included everything inspired by the Holy Spirit (the Old Testament as we know it today). Even the apostle Peter references the apostle Paul’s writings as scipture (see 2 Peter 3:15-16). So even though it was not labeled tas the NT, the scriptures came first.

False. The first writing that would be part of the NT was not written till about 30 yrs (+/_) after pentecost. The first christians, who were catholics, were already celebrating the earliest form of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, led by the Apostles, who would ordain their successors by laying hands (see Number 27 in its earliest form) and appoint presbyters, when they left for another mission. I would suggest that you read up another version of history. You obviously had been lied to.

The Catholics gave birth to the Bible as you know it today, around 397AD. Before that, no one could know which was Scripture. There are books that did not make it to the final canon. And the Catholic Church was the one who sanctified that Canon which you recognize as the Bible today.

So, do you think the CC would contradict itself, and contradict itself in putting together the Catechism of the CC?

 

[pablope]

Hello Nicea325,

No you are correct, prophets are inspired by the Holy Spirit as well to communicate God’s word. However, the apostle Peter says in 2 Peter 1:19,

1

In regards to the many denominations, no doubt many ravenous wolves have come in not sparing the flock (Acts 20:29) and Jesus said if possible even the very elect would be deceived (Matthew 24:24). I believe so many deceptions have entered among the Christian faith, hence the multitude of teachings taking people away from the Bible and Jesus.
[SIGN]
No Holy Spirit guidance there unfortunately.[/SIGN]

There is and it can be found. You just need to remove the scales in your eyes, remove your biases, have an open heart and mind and truthfully submit yourself to the guidance of the HS and allow Him to lead you where He wants to lead you.

 

[NA77]

False premise. Jeus found His Church-FIRST, not NT writings. Not a single writing of the NT was penned until 20-25 years after Christ Ascension into glory. Secondly,the fact Peter mentions Paul’s writings as scripture is not proof scripture came first because the Bible is very clear Jesus founded His Church. Third, of course Paul’s writings were considered scriptrue, he was an Apostle. Last,but there existed hundreds and hundreds of writings and determination of what constituted scripture was not compiled into one volume (The Bible) 300+ years after Christ death.

Hello Nicea325,

The question was whether Catholic Priest celebrating the Mass came first or the New Testament. No doubt Jesus founded the church prior to the NT.

 

[NA77]

There is and it can be found. You just need to remove the scales in your eyes, remove your biases, have an open heart and mind and truthfully submit yourself to the guidance of the HS and allow Him to lead you where He wants to lead you.

Hello pablope,

Amen to your answer. Precisely, why I’m glad to be a Seventh Day Adventist.

God bless,