T
- Status
G
GraceSofia
Guest
I’m so glad somebody looked at it. Thank you.Hi, GraceSofia,
Thank you for that link!
God bless
I am an ex-protestant and it was pages like that which convinced me that the Catholic Church knows what she is teaching.
po18guy
Well-known member
Everything Jesus did or said was instructive. It would have been pointless to tell the devil that he was thinking as man does, because the devil cannot repent or change. Jesus instructs those who can repent and change. Remember also that, at the end of the bread of life discourse in John 6, Jesus told the twelve directly, “Did I not choose each of you, yet one of you is a devil?”
po18guy
Well-known member
It was animal blood. Blood which could not give life, and which was taken which was prohibited, and even that was under the Mosaic covenant. Jesus is the new and eternal covenant. He commands us “take, eat” and “take, drink.” He identified the bread and wine as having become His Body and Blood, so that we might receive it in faith - because to man, it appears for all the world to be only bread and wine. But, we tend to think like man and not like God, correct? It takes the grace of faith to believe in the Eucharist, and those who abandoned Jesus lacked that simple but elusive grace.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Yes Christ did say all of those words. However, here is the catch:
Show us where one person or group of people took his words literally when he said:
A light, a vine, a gate, etc?
Did anyone really believe Jesus was a vine or a gate? Did he also bless the vine,break it and consume it?
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Po18guy,
I really enjoyed your post.
When I read the one you were responding to - I just shook my head and marveled at just how far personal interpretation can go (oooooooooh, I am sure it can go quite further - but, let me just catch my breath on this latest adventure in to creative reading!)
Imagine, Jesus scolding the Devil by saying this angel thinks like a man! Now, that must have been quite an insult, eh?
Unless, of course, it was Peter all the time who had been thinking like a man!
Oh, well, I guess I am ready for the next flight into fantasyland.
God bless
I really enjoyed your post.
When I read the one you were responding to - I just shook my head and marveled at just how far personal interpretation can go (oooooooooh, I am sure it can go quite further - but, let me just catch my breath on this latest adventure in to creative reading!)
Imagine, Jesus scolding the Devil by saying this angel thinks like a man! Now, that must have been quite an insult, eh?
Unless, of course, it was Peter all the time who had been thinking like a man!Oh, well, I guess I am ready for the next flight into fantasyland.
God bless
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, GraceSofia,
Thank you for sharing this personal experience.
If you don’t mind my asking … of course, it is up to you on the response … Prior to ‘swimming the Tiber’ how did your former Protestant group explain the Jews walking away from Christ saying, “This is a hard saying”?
I have always thought to myself - these Jews understood what Christ was saying - and just totally rejected it. There was no ignorance on their part - but, there does appear to bad faith since they sought Christ out after watching Him feed 5,000+ people.
God bless
Thank you for sharing this personal experience.
If you don’t mind my asking … of course, it is up to you on the response …
Prior to ‘swimming the Tiber’ how did your former Protestant group explain the Jews walking away from Christ saying, “This is a hard saying”?I have always thought to myself - these Jews understood what Christ was saying - and just totally rejected it. There was no ignorance on their part - but, there does appear to bad faith since they sought Christ out after watching Him feed 5,000+ people.
God bless
I’m so glad somebody looked at it. Thank you.
I am an ex-protestant and it was pages like that which convinced me that the Catholic Church knows what she is teaching.
G
GraceSofia
Guest
They didn’t. They just avoided it and concentrated on what they thought it meant.Hi, GraceSofia,
Thank you for sharing this personal experience.
If you don’t mind my asking … of course, it is up to you on the response …
I have always thought to myself - these Jews understood what Christ was saying - and just totally rejected it. There was no ignorance on their part - but, there does appear to bad faith since they sought Christ out after watching Him feed 5,000+ people.
God bless
As you know, but I’ll just qualify this anyway
protestant groups vary greatly. I attended a ladies’ Bible study for several years, and it was never brought up. It never occurred to me there was another interpretation; you know, if you are not looking for something you don’t see it. I only remember one time that before a cradle/cultural Catholic lady arrived, the leader of the study, did say to everybody that she did not want to get into these verses because of the Catholic idea of transubstantiation. At that time, it didn’t pique my interest in learning what Catholics believe about it, but I did sort of go hhmmmmm why don’t we just talk about whatever it is? By the time, much later, I was learning about Catholicism, I was already *persona non grata *in the group so I never asked them how they would explain it.Did the study leader understand what she was rejecting? Her husband was a graduate of a Bible college and some sort of pastor; maybe they knew and have some culpability. I don’t know. However, a lot of people are truly ignorant, and (I believe this strongly) prejudice against the Church prevents people from examining objectively what She teaches. Something has to click, reality has to switch for a second, for most to be able to get that glimmer that will lead them Home. Regarding our recent interlocutors, they have been given a lot of wonderful explanations; they have a true responsibility to read and study them with an open heart. If they don’t, they are not so innocent, IMO.
One of the incidents that started me on my way Home did occur in that Bible study, though. Before the study one day in 2005, the women were talking about the funeral of John Paul II and how Catholics worshiped him, blah, blah, blah. I couldn’t believe the nasty stuff I was hearing. I asked them if they seriously believed that Mother Teresa was in Hell?
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, GraceSofia,
Thank you very much.
God bless
Thank you very much.
God bless
They didn’t. They just avoided it and concentrated on what they thought it meant.
As you know, but I’ll just qualify this anyway
Did the study leader understand what she was rejecting? Her husband was a graduate of a Bible college and some sort of pastor; maybe they knew and have some culpability. I don’t know. However, a lot of people are truly ignorant, and (I believe this strongly) prejudice against the Church prevents people from examining objectively what She teaches. Something has to click, reality has to switch for a second, for most to be able to get that glimmer that will lead them Home. Regarding our recent interlocutors, they have been given a lot of wonderful explanations; they have a true responsibility to read and study them with an open heart. If they don’t, they are not so innocent, IMO.
One of the incidents that started me on my way Home did occur in that Bible study, though. Before the study one day in 2005, the women were talking about the funeral of John Paul II and how Catholics worshiped him, blah, blah, blah. I couldn’t believe the nasty stuff I was hearing. I asked them if they seriously believed that Mother Teresa was in Hell?
M
MollyMac
Guest
I agree with you. Jesus did not hold these items up in the air or point to them and say, I Am. (…Atleast from what we read…) What I am pondering is when I read the context of when He held up the bread and said, “this is my body”, it was while they were celebrating the Passover Feast. Christ knew that the Passover feast was a feast that totally pointed to HIM. The bread became a remembrance of His body and the wine His blood. The Passover was a feast of remembrance that God told the Jews to celebrate for the generations to come as a remembrance of when God saved His people and brought them out of the bondage of Egypt. In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul recounts the story of Christ (Luke22:19) telling the disciples and all those who proclaim the Lords death til He comes, to ‘do this in remembrance of Me’. A remembrance of what Christ has done when He brought His people out of the bondage of sin. By becoming a Savior to sinners.
J
jim1130
Guest
I can see where you are coming from; however, “vine,” “gate,” “light,” etc. are understood to be metaphors, then as of now. If I said “you are solid as an oak” would that mean you are an acorn-sprouting tree? No. It is a metaphor to describe your strength and stability. When Christ said He “is the cornerstone that the builders rejected” people understood the metaphor. When Christ told St. Peter that he is the foundation on which Christ will build His Church it was understood that St. Peter was not a stone slab.Yes Christ did say all of those words. However, here is the catch:
Show us where one person or group of people took his words literally when he said:
A light, a vine, a gate, etc?
Did anyone really believe Jesus was a vine or a gate? Did he also bless the vine,break it and consume it?
Here are two examples in St. John’s Gospel where the message is clarified:
St. John 2: 18 The Jews, therefore, answered, and said to him: What sign dost thou show unto us, seeing thou dost these things? 19 Jesus answered and said to them: Destroy this temple; and in three days I will raise it up. 20 The Jews then said: Six and forty years was this temple in building; and wilt thou raise it up in three days? 21 But he spoke of the temple of his body.
St. John 3:3 Jesus answered and said to him: Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith to him: How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born again? 5 Jesus answered: Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Now, taking the pattern established by St. John of (1) Statement, (2) Question; (3) Clarification, let us apply it in St. John 6:
Six times in St. John 6 Jesus states “My flesh and my blood.” This means six opportunities to correct the message; To say He spoke figuratively rather than literally. He was questioned. He repeated His answer. His emphasis that he was speaking literally was repetitiveness punctuated with “Amen, Amen.” Think of school. When your teacher wanted to drive home an important point, a statement was repeated more than once.
Here are homework assignments I would give to you.
1 - Outside of St. John’s Gospel, Chapter 6, find an example in the Bible where eating someone’s body and drinking someone’s blood are figurative statements associated with faith and love.
2 - At Capernaum where Christ addressed the Jews, what did “eating someone’s flesh and drinking someone’s blood” mean to the Jews?
3 - What is the key word in these verses that shows christ is speaking literally rather than figuratively? St. John 6:54-55, Jesus says, “Whosever eats my body and drinks my blood will have eternal life, for, my flesh is indeed food and my blood is indeed drink.”
4 - If the message of Christ at Capernaum was understood to be figurative, why did not Christ call back those who walked away to explain that He was NOT speaking literally? That they misunderstood?
Thank you.
I
in_servitude
Guest
It was very costly to write things down. We think nothing of what it takes to write things down today. Writing on this forum is very cheap, for example. But, for anyone writing something down in the days of Christ had to spend their words carefully. It would be similar to the choices made in building a structure (home/building) today - people are very careful with their floor plans. So, I would give quite a bit of weight to the words they chose to spend.
The Passover feast was a physical example of what was going to happen spiritually in the Eucharist. The Jews HAD to eat the lamb. They HAD to put the blood on their doors. In doing this, they experienced an exodus - a release from bondage into freedom. In the Transfiguration as Jesus was heading to his sacrifice - he discusses the next exodus that he is planning with Moses.
Anamnesis (Greek)- the word is a command, not a request. And, it is not the worlds best translation to say, “Do this in remembrance of me.” From what I’ve read before, it connotes a sense that we are to “bring this into existence again”. Not just “contemplate my Passion.”
Yes, but this is a model of what was to come in the Eucharist on the spiritual level. Not to only just contemplate that time God saved his people.
We are commanded to do this - it’s not an option. So, it isn’t like we are automatically transported out of our bondage of sin.
S
spockrates
Guest
Agreed. It’s a matter of eternal life, or death!
Yes, one would think the earliest Christians would be more likely to understand the teachings of Christ and the apostles than Christians hundreds of years later. I was surprised to find how many of them believed in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. The only possibility that came to mind was that the later Catholic Church might have become deceived and later cherry picked the writings of early Church fathers who agreed with their self deception.
Yes, it is possible the rejection of the doctrine of Transubstantiation was a late development among Christians. There has also been much disagreement among Protestants over this. Luther seems to have believed in a spiritual presence in the bread and wine, while Calvin saw the bread and wine as merely symbols of the body Christ sacrificed and the blood he shed.
Well, as I suggested, both Catholics and Protestants accuse each other of misinterpreting Jesus’ words at the Last Supper. Protestants often think it absurd to think that Christ was holding his own body in his hands when he held up the bread. He must have been speaking figuratively, they tell me.
po18guy
Well-known member
Don’t fall prey to relativism! Protestantism has always been condemned as error - by both Catholic and Orthodox, who believed in, and practiced, the Eucharist for 1,500 years before the rebellion. Both Catholic and Orthodox have the same beliefs in the Eucharistic Presence. Even Luther so believed. It was only after he fell away from the Catholic Church, and others fell away from him, that Christ’s presence was doubted. Think about that word: doubt. Read Genesis 3 to see where and when doubt was first employed.
Look at the big picture: The Holy Spirit, always and everywhere, unites. The Holy Spirit is our consoler, our advocate. The demon, always and everywhere, divides. He sows the seeds of doubt and discouragement.
“Protestantism” is scarcely able to be defined, but its fruits have been division. Division among believers is not from God. Unity is. Our Lord taught us that we will know them by their fruits.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Of trust me, I am not arguing against the Real Presence. I am simply stating that many non-Catholics will use those methaphors as a way to debunk the Real Presence.
T
thesmiter1
Guest
These are excellent points. Good post.
O
onenow1
Guest
Hi all, just passing through I find it hard to believe that a christian would believe;God became man but could not believe in the miricle of miricles meant for our salvation His body and blood.
God Bless
onenow1
God Bless
onenow1
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Spockrates,
We really need to get our time line straight. For 1,500 years we have the uniform teaching and belief of the Real Presence. Then we have the issue of Luther disputing the teachings of the Church - somehow he managed to move from immoral behavior amongst the clergy - to disputing established teachings. Then we note that Luther and Calvin did not agree - and we quickly see that more of those in revolt continued to splinter over the doctrine. Not a surprise - you can see the same thing going on over and over again fueld by personal interpretation of Scripture.
Actually, if you track John 6 - we see some very similar and disturbing behavior between the Jews who walked away from Christ because they did not believe - and the Protestants who are equally adament that ‘…this is a hard saying…’. Yes, Christ was holding His Own, Body, Blood, Human Soul and Divinity in His Hands when He gave the Blessed Food to His Apostles. It really is a miracle - and, that is where accepting Christ’s Own Words - like a little children - becomes our obvious responsibility.
Just read what is in your own Bible. The word ‘…like…’ does not appear anywhere in John 6 - and I think that is noteworthy.
God bless
We really need to get our time line straight. For 1,500 years we have the uniform teaching and belief of the Real Presence. Then we have the issue of Luther disputing the teachings of the Church - somehow he managed to move from immoral behavior amongst the clergy - to disputing established teachings. Then we note that Luther and Calvin did not agree - and we quickly see that more of those in revolt continued to splinter over the doctrine. Not a surprise - you can see the same thing going on over and over again fueld by personal interpretation of Scripture.
Actually, if you track John 6 - we see some very similar and disturbing behavior between the Jews who walked away from Christ because they did not believe - and the Protestants who are equally adament that ‘…this is a hard saying…’. Yes, Christ was holding His Own, Body, Blood, Human Soul and Divinity in His Hands when He gave the Blessed Food to His Apostles. It really is a miracle - and, that is where accepting Christ’s Own Words - like a little children - becomes our obvious responsibility.
Just read what is in your own Bible. The word ‘…like…’ does not appear anywhere in John 6 - and I think that is noteworthy.
God bless
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Onenow1
That is an excellent post.
God bless
That is an excellent post.
God bless
Hi all, just passing through I find it hard to believe that a christian would believe;God became man but could not believe in the miricle of miricles meant for our salvation His body and blood.
God Bless
onenow1
P
ProVobis
Guest
The Latin is “Hoc est enim Corpus Meum” not “Hic est enim Corpus Meum.” Important distinction that is ambiguous at best in the English. The “hoc” agrees in gender with “corpus” and that means it’s no longer bread but His Body." If “hic” had been used then “hic” would agree in gender with “Panem” (in the clause before) and therefore that would be bread and body (consubstantiation, the Lutheran belief) not transubstantiation.I´m confused. Not believing that the Bread is Christ, is not a slight disagreement. If half of the congregation has to resign, then they should. God bless:thumbsup:
- Status