• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

why I believe in the Eucharist

Status
Not open for further replies.

MoNiCa4316

Totus Tuus
Jun 28, 2007
18,882
1,654
✟49,687.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Or, what Catholics want people to think has been their experience.

So now you're saying that we are being dishonest? :confused: do you have any basis for saying this, or do you just find it hard to believe that anyone could possibly like the Catholic church, so if they say they do, you figure they must be lying?

what possible reason would we have for lying though?

It is far easier for me to be a non Catholic than a Catholic...if I wasn't sincere, I wouldn't have converted.

There is not a single Catholic I have ever met on the 'net who could survive more than a few seconds in a debate- and precious few in real life who could.

what do debates have to do with anything?

Actually the Catholics at General Theology are 'surviving' pretty well, in the midst of debates, accusations, and misunderstandings of Catholic doctrines.
 
Upvote 0

MoNiCa4316

Totus Tuus
Jun 28, 2007
18,882
1,654
✟49,687.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0

yashualover

Veteran
Nov 12, 2007
1,622
46
Ontario Canada
Visit site
✟24,675.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
John 6 shows that Jesus must have speaking metaphorically regarding bread and blood, because the event it portrays took place before the Last Supper, when his disciples can have had only two possibilities to consider. These were metaphorical meaning (which frightened most away), and literal cannibalistic eating of Jesus, which was absurd.
I wonder did you come by your belief about the Eucharist on your own, was it taught to you by some minister, read what some theologian said, or have you asked God to explain it to you?
The flesh and blood of the Son of man, denote the Redeemer in the nature of man; Christ and him crucified, and the redemption wrought out by him, with all the precious benefits of redemption; pardon of sin, acceptance with God, the way to the throne of grace, the promises of the covenant, and eternal life. These are called the flesh and blood of Christ, because they are purchased by the breaking his body, and the shedding of his blood. Also, because they are meat and drink to our souls. Eating this flesh and drinking this blood mean believing in Christ. We partake of Christ and his benefits by faith. The soul that rightly knows its state and wants, finds whatever can calm the conscience, and promote true holiness, in the redeemer, God manifest in the flesh. Meditating upon the cross of Christ gives life to our repentance, love, and gratitude. We live by him, as our bodies live by our food. We live by him, as the members by the head, the branches by the root: because he lives we shall live also.
 
Upvote 0

chestertonrules

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2007
8,747
515
Texas
✟11,733.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The flesh and blood of the Son of man, denote the Redeemer in the nature of man; Christ and him crucified, and the redemption wrought out by him, with all the precious benefits of redemption; pardon of sin, acceptance with God, the way to the throne of grace, the promises of the covenant, and eternal life. These are called the flesh and blood of Christ, because they are purchased by the breaking his body, and the shedding of his blood. Also, because they are meat and drink to our souls. Eating this flesh and drinking this blood mean believing in Christ. We partake of Christ and his benefits by faith. The soul that rightly knows its state and wants, finds whatever can calm the conscience, and promote true holiness, in the redeemer, God manifest in the flesh. Meditating upon the cross of Christ gives life to our repentance, love, and gratitude. We live by him, as our bodies live by our food. We live by him, as the members by the head, the branches by the root: because he lives we shall live also.
Purely man made interpretation.

That is not scriptural.

Here's what Paul said:

27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
 
Upvote 0

calluna

Regular Member
Apr 23, 2008
2,237
114
✟25,394.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
Purely man made interpretation.

That is not scriptural.

Here's what Paul said:

27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
That is at least as appropriate under figurative interpretation.
 
Upvote 0

chestertonrules

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2007
8,747
515
Texas
✟11,733.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
That is at least as appropriate under figurative interpretation.
Why would Paul specifically say profaning the BODY and BLOOD of the Lord if he meant something else? What point do you think he his making?

How do you interpret DISCERNING THE BODY?
 
Upvote 0

WarriorAngel

I close my eyes and see you smile
Site Supporter
Apr 11, 2005
73,951
10,060
United States Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟597,590.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
No, Paul was clear.
Jesus was clear.

If Jesus was speaking symbolically, then why did He allow His disciples to walk away disgusted?

And why did He turn to the Apostles and ask if they also would walk away?

Was He speaking literally?
If He wasn't, then why did He say and do these things?

I await the concise response. Thank you.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,264
✟584,012.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
No, Paul was clear.
Jesus was clear.

If Jesus was speaking symbolically, then why did He allow His disciples to walk away disgusted?

And why did He turn to the Apostles and ask if they also would walk away?

Was He speaking literally?
If He wasn't, then why did He say and do these things?

I await the concise response. Thank you.


Jesus frequently allowed those who heard him and didn't understand to walk away without being spoon fed the meaning he was using. Even with his own Apostles. He argued no one into following him or understanding him.

So here is nothing definitive about the Supper in that--even if the passage you are referring to were about the Lord's Supper. There is no reason to think that it is.
 
Upvote 0

calluna

Regular Member
Apr 23, 2008
2,237
114
✟25,394.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
Jesus frequently allowed those who heard him and didn't understand to walk away without being spoon fed the meaning he was using. Even with his own Apostles. He argued no one into following him or understanding him.

So here is nothing definitive about the Supper in that--even if the passage you are referring to were about the Lord's Supper. There is no reason to think that it is.
Now that's catholicism. You have a metaphorical sense, and a literal one.
 
Upvote 0

NoDoubt

Just another member
May 14, 2015
3,878
209
✟27,672.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
CA-Conservatives
ie. words are meaningless and we should feel free to accept or ignore scripture as we see fit.
The Bible is infaillible. God guided the authors of Scripture by inspiration of the Holy Spirit and revealed His truth to us in this manner. You choose to ignore the Holy Spirit as you see fit? :confused:
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.