Who can I defer to in the protestant sphere for the correct answer?

[JRKH]

No its not clear. If it was we would not be having this discussion about it.

The interpretation of Scripture could be wrong on their part, not the writings.

How could St Paul’s interpretation of Scripture be wrong?

You said: lets say the Ancient Church believed the Real presence. Are they right?

Well the Ancient Church includes both the Apostles and those trained by them etc. Therefore the writings of the Ancient Church, some of which are included in the Bible, are consistant in their belief in the Real Presence.
As I said in my previous posting, I quoted only Bible Scripture since I knew this is what you would accept. These quotes I provided, from the Gospels and from St Paul demonstrate what the “Ancient Church” believed.
St Paul believed in the “Real Presence” in the Eucharist. He was quite clear on this.

Now I have not attacked you about your faith but you seem to want to question mine because it don’t go along with what you believe. Now I will not question your faith because I am a better person than that. Good day sir.

I am sorry that you feel attacked. Such was not my intention. I offer my apologies.

Peace
James

 

[rev_kevin]

And yet by what you said, it sounded strikingly similar…Sorry if I offended.

I’m sure you are right and I am equally sure that this was an ongoing thing. People coming and going, listening, following and leaving etc. I mean if Jesus preached for 3 years, and went all up and down Judea and the surrounding country, surely people came ans went all the time. So this makes one ask the question, why did the Gospel writer feel the need to mention this here? What made this different?

**If you were there back then and didn’t know who Jesus was what would you do? I know the answer, you would stay. **But thats because you know about Jesus and what he did and stood for, why he came to earth. But what if you didn’t know all this about Jesus?

You know I’ve asked myself that question and I am sorry to say, being as conservative as I am, I would likely not have followed Him. Such a realization humbles me immensely.

Peace
James

Could be Jesus was testing the 12 disciples and it seemed the right time to do it.

You seem to be a honest man James.

 

[rev_kevin]

How could St Paul’s interpretation of Scripture be wrong?

You said: lets say the Ancient Church believed the Real presence. Are they right?

Well the Ancient Church includes both the Apostles and those trained by them etc. Therefore the writings of the Ancient Church, some of which are included in the Bible, are consistant in their belief in the Real Presence.
As I said in my previous posting, I quoted only Bible Scripture since I knew this is what you would accept. These quotes I provided, from the Gospels and from St Paul demonstrate what the “Ancient Church” believed.
St Paul believed in the “Real Presence” in the Eucharist. He was quite clear on this.

I am sorry that you feel attacked. Such was not my intention. I offer my apologies.

Peace

James

Accepted

Now I just don’t see the Real presence in any of the writings. I don’t see what you see written there.

 

[joe370]

=rev kevin;7201761]No its not clear. If it was we would not be having this discussion about it.

You raise a good point Kevin. Did Jesus leave us with a way to know what the is truth regarding your interpretation vs my interpretation? Clearly the bible is not resolving this matter for us.

Now I have not attacked you about your faith but you seem to want to question mine because it don’t go along with what you believe. Now I will not question your faith because I am a better person than that. Good day sir.

Kevin, I respect you and your faith but I would like to know why, if sola scriptura leads to one truth regarding the Eucharist (after all it is infallible or inerrant so it should) - do we clearly see 2 possible interpretations of the Eucharist. Logically it does not seem as though God intended the bible alone to be self interpretive via private interpretation.

 

[pablope]

Ya hard to swallow. Like, Mary being a ever virgin. Jesus had no brothers and sisters. Jesus is present in the host. Just to name a few.
I was a Catholic for about 40 years and always found these things hard to swollow or accept. Thats why I gave up on being a priest.

Well, at least the cat’s out of the bag…from what I heard or read, anyone who disagrees or leaves the CC is usually for moral reasons and less on theological ones…I will leave it up to you to dwell on this further. Even though you gave up being a priest, you are priest forever. How could you give up the awesome power to forgive sins, or to concsecrate the Eucharist? You had more power than the US president.

I was going to comment on your response to John 6: 56…but it is of no use. You very well know what it means in the CC world. All I would say, is you did not remain or abide in Christ, as the verse says…

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by rev kevin
Ya hard to swallow. Like, Mary being a ever virgin. Jesus had no brothers and sisters. Jesus is present in the host. Just to name a few.
I was a Catholic for about 40 years and always found these things hard to swollow or accept. Thats why I gave up on being a priest.

This is an interesting comment.
You see, I understood rev kevin’s comments to mean he gave up on “becoming” a preist, not that he abandoned his ordaination.
Two understandings from the same, “passage”…Two different “interpretations” of the “written word”, yet only one can be right. hhhmmmmmm

This brings us then to Joe’s question, and one I’ve often asked here…

Originally posted by Joe370
You raise a good point Kevin. Did Jesus leave us with a way to know what the is truth regarding your interpretation vs my interpretation? Clearly the bible is not resolving this matter for us.

Both sides in this have ably stated their position. Both sides are convinced that they are “Spirit led”, bu we have not been able to come to an agreement. Yet it is clear from the subject that there can only be one answer. Either the Eucharist is symbolically or it is truly the Body and Blood of Christ. It cannot be both.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Accepted

Now I just don’t see the Real presence in any of the writings. I don’t see what you see written there.

I commend you on this.
Paul says (Paraphrased): to partake unworthily, without discerning the body, is to profane the body and blood of the Lord and such a one will eat and drink “judgement” on ones self…
You do not “discern the body”, and so you do not “partake”. Thus you have preserved yourself from “partaking unworthily” and by so doing, bringing judgement on yourself.

Yet this disagreement between us, on a matter of such great import, only brings us back to Joe’s question on authority which he has stated above.
The Bible is not helping us here because we don’t see the same things…
Belief in being “Spirit Guided” is not helping us as we are both convinced that our belief is “Spirit Guided”…Yet both cannot be correct…

What shall we do? Shall we not then consider what “The Church”, the “universal community”, the “katholikos ekklesia”, has consistantly held and taught for nearly 2 millenia?

This is what led me deeper into my faith. Not my own understanding or my “personal interpretation”, or what I could “swallow” (as you put it), but rather a reliance on what has been historically accepted and taught by the Catholic (“katholikos”, “universal”) Church (“ekklesia”, “community”) from ancient times until now, and a humble submitting of my will to the Will of Christ’s as he instructed me in Mt 18:15-18.

Peace
James

 

[Cruxis117]

No Christ proved he was the Son of God by his miracles, death on the cross. The roman solder said, Surely this man is the Son of God. The voice of God at Jesus’ baptism, This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased. So no they could not be wrong about this.
Christ is the church and yes the gates of hell will not prevail against Christ.
Now I don’t believe the CC is infallible.

And you can prove this to me?

Christ is not the Church, he is the Head of it. And we are the Body. We are the Church.
No wonder you left the Church, you wish to placed skewed private (and false) translation of Scripture in place of where the Truth is.

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by rev kevin
No Christ proved he was the Son of God by his miracles, death on the cross. The roman solder said, Surely this man is the Son of God. The voice of God at Jesus’ baptism, This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased. So no they could not be wrong about this.
Christ is the church

Well said…
kevin’s take on the term church here is most certainly interesting, making it a single person when the term in fact means “community”.
In Mt 16 Jesus says, “I will build my ‘community’ (ekklesia)”…

I suppose this is to be expected as the logical outcome of “private interpretation”

Peace
James

 

[pablope]

**This is an interesting comment.
You see, I understood rev kevin’s comments to mean he gave up on “becoming” a preist, not that he abandoned his ordaination. **
Two understandings from the same, “passage”…Two different “interpretations” of the “written word”, yet only one can be right. hhhmmmmmm

James

I re-read his comment and he gave up being a priest. I took that to mean he was a priest and is not practicing the faculties anymore.

In response, once ordained a priest, you do not lose your priesthood. He is or was dismissed from practicing the faculties of the priesthood, hence this is what I was referring to as a priest forever. I personally know some priests and this was explained to me. It should be in the CCC somewhere but do not have the time to search it.

 

[PJM]

=joe370;7198143]Hey brother, I respect your opinion even if I don’t agree with it. Do you believe that Jesus left us with a way to know the truth regarding the Eucharist? Yes, no, maybe…

***f course He did. HOWEVER even evident and Factual truth fall’s under ones freewill to accept it and MANY freely choose to “**IN EFFECT” ***call Christ a liar or incompetent; or unaware of the meaning of the WORDS HE [a Perfect God] CHOOSE precisely so that one could not in good conscience apply other devenat meanings to them. **

READ even in the KJB:

Matt. 26:26-28
Mark 14: 22-24
Luke 22:19-21
John 6:40- 55
1 Cor. 11:23-27

That friend is FIVE authors Ispired by God who give Teastmony [and except for John as the attempt failed] there VERY LIVES for he TRUTH of this FACTUAL accounting.

May God grant all Wisdom and Understanding!

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by rev kevin
Thanks for the advice but I have done a lot of Catholic research and found much of it hard to, for a lack of a better word, swallow.

Hi again Rev Kevin; it’s been awahile since we have exchanged thoughts.

If my menory serves [at my age it MAY NOT?] in our last conversation I asked if yor purpose for bing on the Forum was to TEACH your own brand of religion or are you sincerily trying to understand Catholism?

Kevin;

Faith is a Gift measured and distributed ONLY from God. It’s a gift that we who have reveived it and are Blessed because of it MUST regullarly give THANKS to God for it.

It’s not someting attainable on our own. It is PURELY a FREE GIFT from God; that said we can and SHOULD pray for Wisdom, Knowledge and Understanding which LEAD to Faith, and TRUTH and eternal salvation then becomes a POSSIBILITY.

My offer to explain anything you don’t understand about our Catholic Faith is still open, BUT we call it “Faith” because there are many mysteries that exceed our human ability to fully comprehend. Th Euchrist, the Trinity, some of f the Marian dogma’s for example can only be acceptd in the light of Faith as they surpass human understanding.

**Isaiah 55 tells **us God’s ways are not our ways and that His Ways surpass ours. That friend is true.

So let me know if you wish to discuss any topic an ARE OPEN to actually listening to what we share.

Love and prayers Kevin.

UNLESS you in humility seek these gifts it is very unlikely that God will grant them to you.

Pat

 

[wmscott]

Scott
Very good points but when Jesus said “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life.” He is talking about his word. About why he came here. Who ever eats my flesh, whoever accepts him as Lord and Savior.

Amen, amen I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. If you don’t accept Christ as Lord and Savior you will not have the spiritual life in you, but if you accept Christ as Lord and Savior you will have spiritual life in you.

For my flesh is true food, his word is true food.

Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him, if you accept Christ you will be with him and he is with you.

In a nut shell it all has to do with accepting Christ.

Hi Rev, I guess you are entitled to your opinion. As for me it is clear what Christ was talking about. No parables or figurative speech here. It was plain as can be; this is why many of the Jews left because it was too hard of a concept for them to believe. The explanation that you put forth is about 500 years in the making. But I guess this is why you are not Catholic. Which is also fine, I am not trying to slam or demean your beliefs so please do not take it that way. We are still brothers in Christ. Peace

 

[look3467]

Is the bread at the Lord’s table only bread, or is it the Body of Christ? Zwingli will tell you one thing; Luther, another, and these were the very first leaders of the reformed church that spearhead the reformation. To whom can I defer in the protestant sphere for the correct answer?

Joe, what is key and important about our Lord Jesus Christ is what He came to do for you…and I!

Now how you celebrate that is a matter of choice.

The Last supper, the Lord’s supper is a symbolism of that celebration, much as you celebrate your birthday by some family members honoring you with gifts.

The bread broken, represents the body of Christ broken in our place, that the many pieces symbolizes the covering of the whole.
There were 12 apostles which signifies the world, a number which encompasses the whole of humanity, broken, meaning in many different races, religious beliefs and differences.

The blood symbolizes one blood, covers the whole and is not divided but shed for the whole.

The point in Christ’s coming was to save what was already created, by re-creating the existing into a new creation.

The change into a new creature, a new creation, is a spiritual action manifested in the flesh by a change in life style, thoughts and actions to that of the new spiritual kingdoms laws.

Every denomination celebrates the communion as how they choose to, but does not in any way take away the holiness of the celebration.

If you want a simple analogy, think of a family of six, where each child honors the mom or dad in their own special way, yet, still a member of the family.

Remembering Christ for the sacrifice He made for you and I, should be a daily experience, and not just on Sundays.

Communion is an everyday, ever minute experience, that is, if you should desire it so.

My opinion only and does not represent any particular belief.

Blessings, AJ

 

[KathleenGee]

RevKevin,

I think you need to refer to a more substantive Biblical translation than the emotive, recently translated one you are using now.

The closer to the time of the Bible’s origin, I would think closer we are to a solid text.

‘Catholics remember what Jesus did at the Last Supper, “Do this in remembrance of me,” have been obeyed without interruption for nearly two thousand years. Every time Catholics gather for Mass (the meeting place as well for the Word of God), they know they are there to do what Jesus commanded. And they believe that in that action, Jesus is made present for them.’ Inquiry guides, Liguori Publications.

Jesus becomes part of our humanity when the bread and wine are turned into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. When the priest says ‘Amen’, it is no longer Christ alone being offered to the Heavenly Father at Mass as the atonement for sin, but it is Christ – and the Church – being offered to the Heavenly Father as a pleasing sacrifice, and the Lord’s spirit of reconciliation continues through the action and power of the Holy Spirit through the Mass.

This goes back to the Last Supper, and Christ speaks particularly to the Apostles and to future priests, when He said, ‘Do this in remembrance of me…’

The Lord gave us His sacred ministers, structure, sacraments, administration that make up the Church…all concrete, visible signs.

 

[PJM]

=look3467;7203887]Joe, what is key and important about our Lord Jesus Christ is what He came to do for you…and I!

Now how you celebrate that is a matter of choice.

The Last supper, the Lord’s supper is a symbolism of that celebration, much as you celebrate your birthday by some family members honoring you with gifts.

The bread broken, represents the body of Christ broken in our place, that the many pieces symbolizes the covering of the whole.
There were 12 apostles which signifies the world, a number which encompasses the whole of humanity, broken, meaning in many different races, religious beliefs and differences.

The blood symbolizes one blood, covers the whole and is not divided but shed for the whole.

The point in Christ’s coming was to save what was already created, by re-creating the existing into a new creation.

The change into a new creature, a new creation, is a spiritual action manifested in the flesh by a change in life style, thoughts and actions to that of the new spiritual kingdoms laws.

Every denomination celebrates the communion as how they choose to, but does not in any way take away the holiness of the celebration.

If you want a simple analogy, think of a family of six, where each child honors the mom or dad in their own special way, yet, still a member of the family.

Remembering Christ for the sacrifice He made for you and I, should be a daily experience, and not just on Sundays.

Communion is an everyday, ever minute experience, that is, if you should desire it so.

My opinion only and does not represent any particular belief.

Blessings, AJ

Hi Rev. I see you still quote the Bible you wrote.

In a seperate post you misquoted John 6: 55
"My body is real Food and MY BLOOD is TRAL Drink is the correct version. [It does NOT speak of God’s word as you stated].

Consider thse verses my frend:

**1 John 4: 4 **Little children, you are of God, and have overcome them; for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. They are of the world, therefore what they say is of the world, and the world listens to them. **We are of God. Whoever knows God listens to us, and he who is not of God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error". **

**Jn.12: 34 **This is in the context of the last Supper discourse “20 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who receives any one whom I send receives me; and he who receives me receives him who sent me."

**2nd. Cor. 9: 13 **“Under the test of this service, you will glorify God by your obedience in acknowledging the gospel of Christ,”

**2nd. Cor.11: 12 **“And what I do I will continue to do, in order to undermine the claim of those who would like to claim that in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do. 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ.”

2nd. Peter Chapter One verse 20 -21 *“First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. “ *

 

[vsedriver]

Both sides in this have ably stated their position. Both sides are convinced that they are “Spirit led”, bu we have not been able to come to an agreement. Yet it is clear from the subject that there can only be one answer. Either the Eucharist is symbolically or it is truly the Body and Blood of Christ. It cannot be both.

This discussion is missing a lot of what Christ left us. He didn’t leave us with just Sacred Scripture. He left us with Sacred Tradition and Sacred Teaching both of which were operation before Sacred Scripture became Canon. It is these 3 gifts together that give us the Truth. Take one away and the other two collapse causing endless circular arguments.

Scripture says teaching authority was given to the Apostles and their successors. Tradition shows us that the Eucharist was the focus of worship services. Those who learned at the feet of the Apostles all declare the True Presence.

It is only my humble opinion that those who deny the True Presence do so because they can’t accept the authority of Sacred Teaching ie the Magisterium of the Church. Without the Magisterium, Tradition has no substance and Scripture has multiple meanings.

 

[KathleenGee]

Yes, vsedriver, and He also left us the communion of saints to learn from as well!!!

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Scott
Very good points but when Jesus said “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life.” He is talking about his word. About why he came here. Who ever eats my flesh, whoever accepts him as Lord and Savior.

Amen, amen I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. If you don’t accept Christ as Lord and Savior you will not have the spiritual life in you, but if you accept Christ as Lord and Savior you will have spiritual life in you.

For my flesh is true food, his word is true food.

Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him, if you accept Christ you will be with him and he is with you.

In a nut shell it all has to do with accepting Christ.

In your interpretation. Funny though that Jesus did not go back and clarify with all his followers who left him that day. In fact…he just repeats it. Other places in the bible, such as being reborn…he clarifys. But there he doesn’t…hmmmm…

 

[JonNC]

Hey Jon…

Sorry about that…The Lutheran Confessions (which defers to scripture as well as the EC both east and west) - is a guideline for ascertaining the truths found in scripture and it is the Lutheran church leaders that use that guideline to teach - right?

Yes.
So, not unlike the CC, we turn to the early Church for guidance.

Jon