S
st_lucy
Guest
And yet you still wont answer the very obvious questions I asked.
Do you sir understand the 8th commandment? If not than I suggest you study it and stop spreading lies.
- Status
Do you sir understand the 8th commandment? If not than I suggest you study it and stop spreading lies.
C
codebilly
Guest
Hey Bubba,
From the core of your many questions is a spirit rejecting the authority of the Catholic Church.
You must pray about why you reject the Church’s authority? While you pray, do not look at the institutional church, but rather the Church of the Apostles, Martyrs, and Saints.
The Church’s highest teachings are the most simple and most sublime.
The most sublime teaching comes from Jesus Himself, Our Lord and Savior in the sacrificing of Himself at the Last Supper.
The Lord gave us willingly, His Life, His Body and Blood at table when He uttered the words “This IS my Body ,… This IS my Blood” .
I have tried to explain to you in simple terms why Jesus’ real presence cannot be disputed.
The Lord Himself makes this clear with His words. But even human logic points to this fact.
Jesus knew by establishing a New Covenant, this act would cost Him His Mortal Body and Blood.
It is impossible and foolish, to try to separate Jesus’ self sacrifice from the Paschal Meal. It is impossible to separate Jesus’ Real Body and Blood from the Bread and Wine offered at table.
If you study sincerely the priesthood’s relationship with God’s Covenants throughout the bible, you will note “real presence” is always an aspect. In the OT, the real presence was God’s covenant itself, not the sacrifice made by the priest.
But Jesus became the Sacrifice and Oblation. Hence He is all we have to offer the Eternal Father. Hence it is He Himself of Himself.
Do you not believe that the Shekhinah spoken of in the bible was “real presence”.
Think about all of these questions you have. They are endless and leading to more and more questions which are becoming more impossible for you to answer from your own island of interpretation.
You can immediately prove for yourself if Jesus is really present. Look in your community for a Catholic Church and find one offering Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. Go to that place and sit in prayer in that chapel for 1 hour. The door is open for you.
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
You realize, of course, that Protestants also claim the Holy Spriti guides them in their interpretation, don’t you?
I disagree with this but that’s another topic.
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
Yes, but let’s be precise. The opening resolution and the definition of Protestantism make clear that this is a rejection of authority, not necessarily the teachings themselves. The best example is that Protestants don’t reject the Bible.
But as I pointed out severaltimes, that is not what is at issue here. The question is not “is the eucharist the Body of Christ” nor is it “is belief in the Real Presence” founded in the NT (though those are both good questions to explore), but rather “did the Christians up to the end of Acts believe in the Real Presence”.
R
ron77nyc
Guest
This is very interesting.
**Luther, Rome and the Bible **au.christiantoday.com/article/luther-rome-and-the-bible/5255-2.htm
Only one in four Italians had read a passage from the Bible in the past year, the survey revealed, compared to three out of four in the USA. Few even knew whether or not the Gospels were part of the Bible. Philosophy graduates confused Paul with Moses and thought that Jesus wrote Genesis, according to the survey. This despite the encouragement of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) for the faithful to rediscover Scripture as the primary source of spiritual life.
J
jmcrae
Guest
No, it wasn’t. The Church has been giving a Plenary Indulgence for 30 minutes of Scripture reading per day, ever since it became possible to read Scripture at home (which I think was in the late 1800s).
Prior to that, every Catholic heard the Scriptures read out at Mass every time Mass was offered - which was not only on Sundays, but also every day of the week, and sometimes several times a day (for certain feast days that have vigil Masses, morning Masses, and daytime Masses).
It is true that certain translations of the Bible were forbidden for the laity to read (the “thou shalt kill” translation of the King James springs to mind here) - because of the many typographical errors and heretical interpolations contained in them.
C
codebilly
Guest
History and tradition tell us that “real presence” of God or spirits within matter or on earth was a very common belief among both Jews and Gentiles.
In the case of the Jews, the Shekhinah real presence of God on earth was believed.
Among Greeks, “everything” potentially had a spirit living in it. The Romans too borrowing from the Greeks had the same view.
Study of Roman religious practices show that Roman warriors would take their weapons to the temples of Mars to be “consecrated” to that god. The weapon would then take on a life of its own as it was believed to be possessed by the spirit of the god. Then, it was believed that if one killed with the weapon, then it was the god was doing the killing.
We have in more contemporary times, this same belief … that spirit can be combined with matter. King Arthur’s sword as an example, … or the Holy Grail.
So in fact, much more so then, would be the unquestionable belief that Jesus Real Presence, would enter into the offering of bread and wine carried out by His command.
A central component of the Greek Polis was worship of God (greek gods) in the temple located at the center of the city. The word Polis is related to the words Parish and police. The motto of the policeman is “To serve and protect”. The Shekhinah presence of God was believed to be a real presence on earth manifestation of God as protector of the city (e.g. Jerusalem)
As a side note, the Roman spear that pierced the side of Our Lord , was consecrated to the Roman god Mars. It can be historically proven that the deity Mars is one and the same as Maruga (of Persia and south India). The legend or myth in south India among Shaivites is that the spear of Maruga would kill and destroy all sin forever. It is a fact that, at the time of Christ’s Crucifixion, the Roman’s believed that Mars (Maruga) was the one who pierced the Savior.
Yes … DEFINITELY they had complete and total belief in the “REAL PRESENCE”
We live in an age, where almost nothing is sacred anymore. But then, there were sacred places, and sacred things, the Holy of the Holies.
I was at a monastery 30 years among protestant visitors. Nice people and devout. They visit a chapel and saw in the chapel the tabernacle where the Blessed Sacrament was kept.
They asked one of the monks “Was there another name for ‘tablernacle’ ?” “Was it called something else (before)”?
The monk (a convert) did not have an answer … but suddenly I broke my fast of silence and blurted out “It was called the Ark of the Covenant”
YES! Those Christians in ACTS would have had NO DOUBT and not even a single question of REAL PRESENCE. Praise the Lord!
Stephen168
New member
I agree, from posts 2, 71, 134, and 199 we see examples of why we know the first century Christians believed in the real presences. From posts 135, 148, 202, and 209, I think this might be a game and not a search for truth. If I am wrong, I think it is time of those in revolt to show where first century Christians did not believe in the real presence. Some quotes from first century Christian leaders that might say something like: this is a symbol of my body, my blood is contained in this wine, would be helpful.
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
Yes, Shekhinah, or holiness, is an ancient concept with many meanings. If a priest blesses a rosary, or a meal for that matter, then it becomes holy. Relics are holy, etc.
If the doctrine of Real Presence meant nothing more than a priestly blessing I don’t think it would be a point of controversy between Protestants and Catholics.
C
codebilly
Guest
Agree. The evidence of belief in the “True Presence” is overwhelming. Any serious scholar and prayerful seeker cannot refute this fact.
Also … we should be reminded that within Apostolic succession is Wisdom and Knowledge of the Truth.
Just like a master craftsman who carefully passes a trade or skill to an apprentice, so is the Church’s convenance of Wisdom through Apostolic succession.
If the succession is broken, then knowledge is lost. Those not initiated into the Church, have limited tools by which they can discover the Truth.
C
codebilly
Guest
Nice try Bubba … but your watered down version of Shekhinah is not what is meant by Shekhinah.
Exodus 40:35, “Moses could not enter the Tent of Meeting, for the cloud rested [shakhan] upon it, and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle.”
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
Interestingly, 2, 71, 134, and 199 are examples where an argument for Real Presence is put forward based on the NT while 135, 148, 202, and 209 seem to be where I tried to redirect the discussion back to the question of whether Chrisitians in the time of Acts belived in Real Presence.
(And, by the way, Acts ends before Peter’s death which is about 65AD, not 99AD. There is more time between the end of Acts and Ignatius than between the beginning and end of Acts.)
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
Fair enough, but if you mean to make this particular comparison then you need to explain why the Christian Jews would not fear to consume the body and blood, indeed, would need to be told by Paul not to hog the food as if they had not eaten at home already.
Stephen168
New member
Exactly! Also, I would think anyone who thinks they have the truth, or is truly seeking the truth would answer questions and answer them honestly. Something else you fail to do.
(And by the way, If I am wrong, I think it is time of those in revolt to show where first century Christians did not believe in the real presence. Some quotes from first century Christian leaders that might say something like: this is a symbol of my body, my blood is contained in this wine, would be helpful.)
R
ron77nyc
Guest
I believe in the real presence but I never thought of this until now:
Acts 15:28 “For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials:
29 that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell.”
Genesis 9:4 "Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.
Leviticus 3:17 ‘It is a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings: you shall not eat any fat or any blood.’"
Leviticus 7:26 'You are not to eat any blood, either of bird or animal, in any of your dwellings.
Leviticus 17:10 'And any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people.
Leviticus 17:14 "For as for the life of all flesh, its blood is identified with its life. Therefore I said to the sons of Israel, ‘You are not to eat the blood of any flesh, for the life of all flesh is its blood; whoever eats it shall be cut off.’
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
Then you are simply seeking to change the subject to a debate that you would prefer to have. If you prefer to discuss different questions than those I have raised here you are free to start a new thread.
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
Yes, this is one of the reasons that Jews (and perhaps some Protestants too) accuse Christians of mixing Judaism and paganism.
That said, the concept of eating the sacrificial animal was not unJewish but standard practice.
B
Bubba_Switzler
Guest
I think here you are still laboring under the misapprehension that if the Christians in Acts did not believe in Real Presence then they must have beleived in symbolism Protestant style. But several times I have pointed to a third possibility: that they had no belief on the matter.
In simple logical terms, if I say that before this morning I did not believe X it does not mean that yesterday I believed ~X. I may not have been aware of X.
F
fbl9
Guest
Those who will quote this scripture against Christ being present in the Eucharist fail to not eat FAT also…Note the above is against that of eating blood of an ANIMAL,it has nothing to do with the drinking of the blood of GOD.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Exactly. And Jesus is very clear in John 6 that in order to receive Eternal Life, we must literally drink His blood. There is no room for a symbolic interpretation of His words in that chapter.
- Status