The Real Presence

[PRmerger]

I fully doubt he would be full blown Catholic.He would be evangelical -that is one needs a personal experience with Christ

Heh. What could be more of a personal experience than the One Flesh Union that Catholics enjoy (and the Orthodox of course.)

It’s like a couple, enjoying a platonic relationship with each other claiming they have a more “personal experience” with each other compared to the husband and wife who enjoy the marital embrace and actually become One Flesh.

 

[CopticChristian]

Heh. What could be more of a personal experience than the One Flesh Union that Catholics enjoy (and the Orthodox of course.)

It’s like a couple, enjoying a platonic relationship with each other claiming they have a more “personal experience” with each other compared to the husband and wife who enjoy the marital embrace and actually become One Flesh.

Augustines stuff ,then I’d have to read 4,5, 6 various statements of faith by the main denominations ,and go from there .I fully doubt he would be full blown Catholic.He would be evangelical -that is one needs a personal experience with Christ .

So I am going to go and read all of Augustine. As I look on my shelf, that is about 6 volumes of the Patristics, about 600 pages each, I read about 30 pages an hour, so 20 hours per volume or 120 hours if I read how many hours a day?

Then I am going to read all of the statements of faith that originated about 500 years ago and since and wait, these statements originated 500 years ago, Augustine wrote about 1500 years ago, wait wasn’t Augustine a Catholic?

Wait I believe that I’ve noticed that all you Catholic guys in particular that guy Guanophore is an evangelical…whoa Augustine was a Catholic Evangelical, you guys are Catholic Evangelicals…

wait a minute you guys really do have this personal relationship down don’t you, all you Catholics.

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

So I am going to go and read all of Augustine. As I look on my shelf, that is about 6 volumes of the Patristics, about 600 pages each, I read about 30 pages an hour, so 20 hours per volume or 120 hours if I read how many hours a day?

Then I am going to read all of the statements of faith that originated about 500 years ago and since and wait, these statements originated 500 years ago, Augustine wrote about 1500 years ago, wait wasn’t Augustine a Catholic?

Wait I believe that I’ve noticed that all you Catholic guys in particular that guy Guanophore is an evangelical…whoa Augustine was a Catholic Evangelical, you guys are Catholic Evangelicals…

wait a minute you guys really do have this personal relationship down don’t you, all you Catholics.

^ Catholic Evangelical

 

[GaryTaylor]

Its knowledge which is truth, and then we pass it on in Love. The truth is pretty hard to ignore once you see it.

 

[benedictus2]

I am sorry that you find this confusing…here’s how you can tell the difference:

If it looks like a human body, has weight like a human body, has features of a human body (you know, like arms, legs, head, torso etc.), can be touched etc, is covered in skin with some hair etc. …then it is real flesh and blood.

If it looks like bread, has the weight of a loaf of bread, is made of baked flour and other ingredients (you know like eggs, milk, salt), covered with a crust etc. …then it is bread and could only be symbolic of human flesh.

I realize that I could have supplied a much more detailed list of features to allow you to distinguish between flesh and bread, but this isn’t rocket science. The above should be sufficient to enable you to sort through your confusion. Good luck…I’m sure you’ll figure it out eventually.

So you are saying that Jesus was lying when He said of the wheat bread during the last supper this is my body? of the wine this is my blood?

Also, if you take the synoptic gospels on their own, can you make sense of this narrative?

If it is symbolic, what is there in the synoptic Gospels that explains why He did what He did just before He died?

 

[benedictus2]

Its knowledge which is truth, and then we pass it on in Love. The truth is pretty hard to ignore once you see it.

I think they do see the truth, that is why it makes their rejection more interesting, because it means that they are going against what they do apprehend.

 

[benedictus2]

Heh. What could be more of a personal experience than the One Flesh Union that Catholics enjoy (and the Orthodox of course.)

It’s like a couple, enjoying a platonic relationship with each other claiming they have a more “personal experience” with each other compared to the husband and wife who enjoy the marital embrace and actually become One Flesh.

That reminds me of (I think ) Scott Hahn when he was asked why Catholics do not let non-Catholics come up for communion.

He said that for evangelicals communion is like a hand shake so obviously you can shake hands with anyone.

Then for some it is like a kiss and you kiss only those who are close to you.

But for the Catholic it is like the marital act, very intimate, and you only do that if you belong to the Bride of Christ.

 

[benedictus2]

^ Catholic Evangelical

Catholics MUST BE evangelical.

Once Catholics start subscribing to 'let’s keep faith private", that is when the secularism takes over. The Faith is meant to be spread! So… march.

 

[benedictus2]

Hey guys, please check your quotes. I am not sure who is saying what because of the way your posts are being displayed.

I think there have been some quotes attributed to the wrong members.

Peace!

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

We have a few here who don’t know how to separate quotes from other posts from their own.

 

[benedictus2]

We have a few here who don’t know how to separate quotes from other posts from their own.

I think they should check their post after submitting to make sure that it displays right and then edit it after that. Otherwise it looks like they are saying what the other person is saying.

 

[benedictus2]

Disagree with slight inference of the importance of “your” Church. Again ,there was a bible before councils.

No there wasn’t. The first council was the council of Jerusalem. There was no Bible then only the OT.

Also, the Bible that we Catholics have now, is the same set of books that was set out at Carthage.

The real focus should be that God gave them to us(vatican 1)

Yes God indeed gave us the Bible. But the question is HOW? The answer is through His Church.

The Corinthians benefited from day 1 of receiving Paul’s letter ,as I do when I first read it.

Yes, but did they have the Bible with the Gospels, etc.

So if you say that only the Bible is important then poor Corinthians indeed.

.Yes,thank the Corinthian church for respecting it and keeping it and sharing it.Thank all the other churches for getting copies of it and respecting , keeping and sharing them also, etc.,etc.,etc.,… down to you and me…

Indeed, but the Bible is more than just Corinthians.

If the Bible is really all that is important, tell me why is it that Christ did not just write everything and disappeared to the ether? Why, of all things did He build a Church? Why did He go to all the trouble of picking disciples? Surely as God, He could easily have written the entire book and more by Himself?

Do you know that there are Hindus and Buddhists who are starting to restructure their own figure of Christ adjusted to Buddhist and Hindu beliefs based on the Bible? Would they be equally right as you are about Christ (considering that their construct would be different)?

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

If the Bible is really all that is important, tell me why is it that Christ did not just write everything and disappeared to the ether? Why, of all things did He build a Church? Why did He go to all the trouble of picking disciples? Surely as God, He could easily have written the entire book and more by Himself?

Do you know that there are Hindus and Buddhists who are starting to restructure their own figure of Christ adjusted to Buddhist and Hindu beliefs based on the Bible? Would they be equally right as you are about Christ (considering that their construct would be different)?

Why not? His only criteria to be a “christian” is for someone to proclaim belief in Christ and then that’s it. It seems whoever that “Christ” would be is irrelevent. The Church, doctrines, history, truth; its all just relative anyway. We can be whatever we want to be, just so long as we call on Jesus as our Savior we’re saved. We’re all good, sincere people so we should all be saved regardless. Such silly things as truths and doctrines are intolerant and only divide.

What is most tolerant and equitable is what is most important.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Coming close to that magic 1000 mark folks.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I think they do see the truth, that is why it makes their rejection more interesting, because it means that they are going against what they do apprehend.

Yes a pushing away, through free-will, a choice to remain of the flesh against Gods Will.

Peace

 

[GaryTaylor]

Why not? His only criteria to be a “christian” is for someone to proclaim belief in Christ and then that’s it. It seems whoever that “Christ” would be is irrelevent. The Church, doctrines, history, truth; its all just relative anyway. We can be whatever we want to be, just so long as we call on Jesus as our Savior we’re saved. We’re all good, sincere people so we should all be saved regardless. Such silly things as truths and doctrines are intolerant and only divide.

What is most tolerant and equitable is what is most important.

Right, We have to think subjective and objective here. Our Love becomes the final judgement, however Sanctifying Grace also must and does lead one upward and to truth. Truth and Correct worship become the goal. As we see mankind does not all know God, however God does know them.

Once truth is understood then one is subject to it. If you ignore truth your intentionally living a lie.

Peace

 

[GaryTaylor]

I think they should check their post after submitting to make sure that it displays right and then edit it after that. Otherwise it looks like they are saying what the other person is saying.

Quietly speaking, some also do this intentionally now and again. I know to retain or reach long term memory, it must pass through short term memory, the obstacle to comprehension is short term memory. Rightfully so then, should you read something twice and carefully the second time? It will more likely be subjected to short term, thus long term memory.

Off to church for me.

Peace

 

[PRmerger]

I am sorry that you find this confusing…here’s how you can tell the difference:

If it looks like a human body, has weight like a human body, has features of a human body (you know, like arms, legs, head, torso etc.), can be touched etc, is covered in skin with some hair etc. …then it is real flesh and blood.

This segues nicely with a point I always love to make in providing* apologia* for the RP.

The above argument may have been made by Jews in ancient Israel regarding the divinity of Christ. They would say, “He looks like a human, has weight like a human, has features of a human (you know, like arms, legs, head, torso, etc), can be touched, etc, is covered in skin with some hair etc…He is therefore human and NOT DIVINE.”

If these Jews had demanded a piece of the flesh of Christ and examined it, they would have found only this:



Yet, of course, Christians who deny the RP because it “looks like merely bread” cannot deny the divinity of Christ who “looks like merely a human”.

See what happens if you deny the RP in the Eucharist? You end up not being able to defend the Incarnation.

 

[irishpatrick]

No matter what arguments or debates or so-called scholarly studies are made, one must begin with what Jesus actually said:

---

***“I am the bread which came down from heaven.”

"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die.

I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."

"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;

he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. **

He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.

This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever." *​

The Real Presence, of all things held by the Roman Catholic Church, is without doubt one of the most heavily documented realities in Scripture. The quotes above are just a portion.

If one desires to literally touch Heaven, all they need do is to receive the Lord during Communion, for at that exact moment, each person who receives is in actual physical Communion with Jesus Real Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. It is a most amazing gift that the Lord promises when He said He would always be with us (along with the Holt Spirit).

There are so many reasons for all Christians to be Roman Catholics, yet no matter any other arguments or debates over other teachings and other issues that prevent people from entering the Church, there is NO greater reason to be Catholic, than being able to receive Jesus in the Eucharist.

A miracle happens at every Mass, in every Catholic Church across the globe, every single day. Jesus comes to us in His Real Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity!

 

[Radical]

This segues nicely with a point I always love to make in providing* apologia* for the RP.

The above argument may have been made by Jews in ancient Israel regarding the divinity of Christ. They would say, “He looks like a human, has weight like a human, has features of a human (you know, like arms, legs, head, torso, etc), can be touched, etc, is covered in skin with some hair etc…He is therefore human and NOT DIVINE.”

The first century Jews (as evidenced in the gospels) would have believed in demon possession. As such, simply b/c a human body was detected by their senses, standing in front of them, the Jews would not say that the presence of the human body precluded the presence of a supernatural entity being in front of them too.

let’s simplify this for you: Example A…There is a thing in front of you. If it is a choice between it being bread or a human body and it has the weight of bread, the feel of bread, the appearance of bread etc. and does not have the weight of a body, the feel of a body , the appearance of a body, then it is bread.

Example B…There is a thing in front of you. If it is a choice between it being a human (and nothing else) or a human possessed of a supernatural nature, and it has the weight of human body, the feel of human body, the appearance of human body etc. then you don’t have enough information to make the choice, b/c the presence of a human body does not preclude the presence of a supernatural being with the human body…so you look further. If, after some time, the thing doesn’t do anything requiring supernatural abilities, you can conclude it is merely human. On the other hand, if after some time, the thing does stuff that could only be explained by it using supernatural powers, then you can conclude it is more than just human

Yet, of course, Christians who deny the RP because it “looks like merely bread” cannot deny the divinity of Christ who “looks like merely a human”.

transubstantiation claims that the presence of the body precludes the presence of the bread…does any one say that the presence of a human body precludes the presence of the supernatural

See what happens if you deny the RP in the Eucharist? You end up not being able to defend the Incarnation.

only if you are very limited in your abilities…and those are the people that you don’t want to have defending the incarnation (on your behalf) any how.