Catholic's, at what point does it become the body?

[razeontherock]

So many Catholics do not know their faith and that is the reason why they are easy prey to other faiths. That is not your fault that is my Churches fault. It was he/her fault that they did n't understand it, but the Churches fault for not effectively teaching the faith.

That's not just a Catholic problem, Brother. And those falling away the most? College students, of every Faith. Even in seminaries and Bible Colleges, the stats are the same as "the world." Scary stuff ...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

medieval, uneducated hooey.

Forgive me...

 

[Erose]

That's not just a Catholic problem, Brother. And those falling away the most? College students, of every Faith. Even in seminaries and Bible Colleges, the stats are the same as "the world." Scary stuff ...

I am beginning to believe that we are going into the time of the Great Apostasy that Paul prophesied. So many Christians are falling away from the faith in all faith traditions. I mean look at Europe. Christianity is becoming a endangered animal in Europe.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I am beginning to believe that we are going into the time of the Great Apostasy that Paul prophesied. So many Christians are falling away from the faith in all faith traditions. I mean look at Europe. Christianity is becoming a endangered animal in Europe.

I myself [and other Preteists] believe that was already fulfilled....but then again......does it really matter

What is the Apostasy in 2 Thess 2? - Christian Forums
What is the Apostasy in 2 Thess 2?

2 Thess 2:3 No any ye should be deluding according to no yet one manner/way, that if-ever no may be coming the apostasy/apo-stasia <646> first.
And may be being un-covered the Man of the Sin, the Son of the destruction.

 

[Kepha]

this = is?

This my Body = This IS my body. Not that hard to get really.

It's clear that they grumbled over His claim of heavenly origin here.
(6:62)They said, &#8220;Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, &#8216;I have come down from heaven&#8217;?&#8221;

That's what I said. And it's clear they walked away grumbling some more after He said a second time and more forcefully "Truly Truly I say to you......"

Jesus made no attempt to soften what he said, and no attempt to correct misunderstandings, because there were none.

Blinded by the ignorance of their own unbelief, they were unable to understand the spiritual significance of which Jesus spoke.

Ignorance of their own belief? These were His diciples who saw many miracles and wonders He had done up to that point yet they couldn't believe He meant He's spiritual life in a metaphorical sense? C'mon Jig you're better than that.

If &#8216;the Jews&#8217; continued to take his words literally they would be disgusted and appalled. The drinking of any blood was forbidden (Lev. 17:10&#8211;14). He told them that unless they did this repulsive thing they would have no life in them&#8212;they would not experience eternal life that comes from a relationship with the Father. Having stated things negatively, Jesus then stated them positively: Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. To understand properly what Jesus was saying in highly metaphorical language, readers must remember that he said the same thing in more straightforward terms in 6:40: &#8216;everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day&#8217;. Placing these two verses side by side, it is clear that eating Jesus&#8217; flesh and drinking his blood is a metaphor for believing in him.

The problem with that interpretation as Fr. John A. O&#8217;Brien (O&#8217;Brien, The Faith of Millions, 215). explains:

"The phrase &#8216;to eat the flesh and drink the blood,&#8217; when used figuratively among the Jews, as among the Arabs of today, meant to inflict upon a person some serious injury, especially by calumny or by false accusation. To interpret the phrase figuratively then would be to make our Lord promise life everlasting to the culprit for slandering and hating him, which would reduce the whole passage to utter nonsense". For an example of this use, see Micah 3:3.

Since again, Paul talked being guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ (strong words connected to homicide in a civil judical sense) and He was actually talking about Communion so there is no confusion here. Two verses side by side saying some very significant things regarding the Body and Blood of our Lord. Partaking sybolically the bread and wine or grape juice or whatever you guys use, if anything demolishes the precise meaning of that passage.

It proves this passage is not talking about "actual" communion. So, why is it being brought up to support it?

Huh? That's like saying it proves He's not talking symbolically either since He has yet to die and rise again. It was like a prerequisite to what would take place in the near future regarding the Last Supper. You made zero sense saying what you just said.

 

[Jig]

See now you have also brought in the laws of physics as well. Just couldn't help yourself.

You are the one who brought up the laws of physics. Not me. I was trying to tell you this was not true.

you guys do not believe that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Jesus is due to the lack of belief that He cannot do it because it violates the laws of Physics.

Yeh? Still haven't seen a verse or passage from your side that shows this is a symbolic act and nothing more. When you take all of the passages about the Lord's Supper every single one uses words that state this act happens. No where does it imply that it is a metaphor or a symbol.

This is your opinion.

Context = a symbol rich memorial meal, held during a symbol rich Jewish Feast.

The cup Jesus picked up at the end of their meal was the 3rd (out of 4) cups of wine used in the Passover meal. It symbolized "redemption". This symbolism fits perfectly with what Jesus said about it. No need to assume Jesus broke this pattern.

The issues is whether or not the Lord's Supper is really the body and blood of Jesus. But the problem on your side is that the only argument you have is that it breaks the laws of physics. If you do not believe me go back and read this thread. You don't have to take my word for it go back and read the posts and you will see that the symbolic protestants keep ending up with this argument for they and you cannot refute the Catholic claim from scripture.

The Catholic claim has been refuted. It's just not possible for a Catholic to believe that the bread doesn't turn into Jesus' actual flesh without becoming an apostate.

Unlike me, you have NO choice but to believe in this bizarre idea.

Because that is what your faith tradition tells you to believe and as such you believe.

The Protestant faith traditions hold BOTH real presence AND symbolic representation. I'm not limited to one belief like you are.

You are correct in your assessment. I would cease being Catholic in my mind. You may have been Catholic at one time or another, but obviously you didn't truly understand it or you wouldn't have left.

I truly understood the Catholic position and defenses. I even took Catholic apologetic classes. I never wanted to leave Catholicism. I loved it! I thought Protestants were strange, delusional people.

My grandfather is an ordained Deacon. I was personal friends with the priests and they would come to eat dinner at my house on a normal basis. I even traveled to another country to sit under a Mass held by the Pope. I was confirmed under Saint Padre Pio and was blessed by a Bishop.

Yet, I still left the Roman Church. God opened my eyes to the truth.

 

[ivebeenshown]

I am beginning to believe that we are going into the time of the Great Apostasy that Paul prophesied. So many Christians are falling away from the faith in all faith traditions. I mean look at Europe. Christianity is becoming a endangered animal in Europe.

Huh, I just read a CNN article earlier in the day which cited a Newsweek poll of Americans which estimates that 85% of adults identify as Christian yet 76% or something like that are 'convinced' God is real. Odd thing there.

 

[Jig]

Huh, I just read a CNN article earlier in the day which cited a Newsweek poll of Americans which estimates that 85% of adults identify as Christian yet 76% or something like that are 'convinced' God is real. Odd thing there.

This is because many are just cultural Christians. This is a broad term used to describe people with either ethnic or religious Christian heritage who may not believe in the religious claims of Christianity, but who retain an affinity for the culture, art, music, and so on related to it.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I myself [and other Preteists] believe that was already fulfilled....but then again......does it really matter

What is the Apostasy in 2 Thess 2? - Christian Forums
What is the Apostasy in 2 Thess 2?

2 Thess 2:3 No any ye should be deluding according to no yet one manner/way, that if-ever no may be coming the apostasy/apo-stasia <646> first.
And may be being un-covered the Man of the Sin, the Son of the destruction.

when you say it like that . .. it reminds me of

Acts 20:29
I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock.

 

[Erose]

You are the one who brought up the laws of physics. Not me. I was trying to tell you this was not true.

Maybe not you but others had and you just stepped into the debate.

This is your opinion.

Maybe it is, but it is a solid one.

Context = a symbol rich memorial meal, held during a symbol rich Jewish Feast.

Still no verses to refute the Catholic claim.

The cup Jesus picked up at the end of their meal was the 3rd (out of 4) cups of wine used in the Passover meal. It symbolized "redemption". This symbolism fits perfectly with what Jesus said about it. No need to assume Jesus broke this pattern.

The 3rd cup may have represented redemption but the new cup of the New Covenant became the true cup of redemption.

The Catholic claim has been refuted. It's just not possible for a Catholic to believe that the bread doesn't turn into Jesus' actual flesh without becoming an apostate.

Actually it hasn't. It has been denied and disbelieved but never effectively refuted.

Unlike me, you have NO choice but to believe in this bizarre idea.

The Protestant faith traditions hold BOTH real presence AND symbolic representation. I'm not limited to one belief like you are.

Yes but you are following your faith tradition of whatever church you are now part of. Also you are right I have no choice but to follow my God and my faith. I have been convinced without a shadow of a doubt that the Catholic faith is the true faith. So you are right I have no choice for this is what God has taught me to believe. It is the truth and I can only believe in that truth that has been revealed to me through His Church and Scriptures.

I truly understood the Catholic position and defenses. I even took Catholic apologetic classes. I never wanted to leave Catholicism. I loved it! I thought Protestants were strange, delusional people.

My grandfather is an ordained Deacon. I was personal friends with the priests and they would come to eat dinner at my house on a normal basis. I even traveled to another country to sit under a Mass held by the Pope. I was confirmed under Saint Padre Pio and was blessed by a Bishop.

Yet, I still left the Roman Church. God opened my eyes to the truth.

Or the devil led you astray, but that is for you to discern. I am sure that every single heretic felt like he/she was following the truth, but the question is are they?

 

[Jig]

Or the devil led you astray, but that is for you to discern. I am sure that every single heretic felt like he/she was following the truth, but the question is are they?

Am I a heretic for not believing the bread at communion is not actually Jesus' flesh?

 

[tadoflamb]

Am I a heretic for not believing the bread at communion is not actually Jesus' flesh?

If you're in a Calvary Chapel you'd be absolutely correct.

 

[razeontherock]

Am I a heretic for not believing the bread at communion is actually Jesus' flesh?

Burn him, burn him! Break out the thought police and the comfy chair!

The jig is up the news is out they finally found you

 

[razeontherock]

The problem with that interpretation as Fr. John A. O’Brien (O’Brien, The Faith of Millions, 215). explains:

"The phrase ‘to eat the flesh and drink the blood,’ when used figuratively among the Jews, as among the Arabs of today, meant to inflict upon a person some serious injury, especially by calumny or by false accusation. To interpret the phrase figuratively then would be to make our Lord promise life everlasting to the culprit for slandering and hating him

Yes, so when we confess our sin and recognize it is WE who are responsible for His death, we fit the language here perfectly

Kinda like this:

Romans 5:10 "For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son"


Whatsamatta, too "protestant" for you? Afraid some 'Sola Scriptura' (never have heard a Pr use that term) going to rub off on you? Look at the word, man; this is how it works. Very potent symbolism going on here! Be enriched by it, but do put it in it's proper place.

 

[Jig]

If you're in a Calvary Chapel you'd be absolutely correct.

So you are calling me a heretic.

 

[winsome]

Am I a heretic for not believing the bread at communion is not actually Jesus' flesh?

You espouse a belief that was condemned as false. However that does not make you a heretic.

“It is obvious that the old category of ‘heresy’ is no longer of any value. Heresy, for Scripture and the early Church, includes the idea of a personal decision against the unity of the Church, and heresy’s characteristic is pertinacia, the obstinacy of him who persists in his own private way. This, however, cannot be regarded as an appropriate description of the spiritual situation of the Protestant Christian…….. The conclusion is inescapable, then: Protestantism today is something different from heresy in the traditional sense, a phenomenon whose true theological place has not yet been determined.”

(Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, The Meaning of Christian Brotherhood, pp. 87-88)

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Though heterodox can be an appropriate term I think, insofar as that it has been the historic and orthodox opinion of the Christian Church that the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ.

By the same token, just so it doesn't seem like I'm trying to kick anyone in the pants, from the vantage point of the Catholic and Orthodox (both of the capital letter persuasion) I'm fairly certain the Lutheran position on any number of things is regarded as pretty heterodox; even though the term heretic is no longer used (*tips hat toward Vatican II*).

The Lutheran view on Justification departs fairly drastically from the position adhered to by the Scholastic theologians, and it is fairly altogether alien from the entire Orthodox theological schema using theological language wholly Western. Thus perhaps "doubly heterodox" from the Orthodox POV.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[winsome]

Context = a symbol rich memorial meal, held during a symbol rich Jewish Feast.

There is no context in a Jewish feast for someone holding up a piece of bread and saying “This is my body”.

The context is given in John chapter 6
I am the bread of life …… I am the living bread that came down from heaven….. unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you…. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life….. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink…….

Most of his followers left. They understood he was speaking literally.
Jesus turns to the twelve and says “Do you also want to leave?” This is a crunch point There is no compromise in this. He offers no further explanation. Jesus is saying I meant what I said. Do you believe in me?

The apostles are confused but Peter answers “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.” Jesus has just told them that they must eat his flesh and drink his blood to have eternal life. Now Peter says you have the words of eternal life. So he is accepting that he has to literally eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood to have eternal life because Jesus has said it and Jesus is the Holy One of God, even though he does not understand how this can happen without there being some sort of horrible cannibalistic ritual. And Jesus does not enlighten them.

At the Last Supper Jesus blesses the bread and wine. Does he say “Hey guys, remember that time a few weeks ago when I really got you wound up about eating my flesh and drinking my blood? You really fell for it. Of course I was just winding you up. You only have to eat this bread and drink this wine as a sort of symbolic action. We just pretend it’s my body and blood."
No he says
This IS my body
This IS my Blood

Take and EAT
DRINK from this all of you.

Jesus said what he meant, and he meant what he said.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

There is no context in a Jewish feast for someone holding up a piece of bread and saying “This is my body”.

The context is given in John chapter 6
I am the bread of life …… I am the living bread that came down from heaven….. unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you…. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life….. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink…….

Most of his followers left. They understood he was speaking literally.
Jesus turns to the twelve and says “Do you also want to leave?” This is a crunch point There is no compromise in this. He offers no further explanation. Jesus is saying I meant what I said. Do you believe in me?

The apostles are confused but Peter answers “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.” Jesus has just told them that they must eat his flesh and drink his blood to have eternal life. Now Peter says you have the words of eternal life. So he is accepting that he has to literally eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood to have eternal life because Jesus has said it and Jesus is the Holy One of God, even though he does not understand how this can happen without there being some sort of horrible cannibalistic ritual. And Jesus does not enlighten them.

At the Last Supper Jesus blesses the bread and wine. Does he say “Hey guys, remember that time a few weeks ago when I really got you wound up about eating my flesh and drinking my blood? You really fell for it. Of course I was just winding you up. You only have to eat this bread and drink this wine as a sort of symbolic action. We just pretend it’s my body and blood."
No he says
This IS my body
This IS my Blood

Take and EAT
DRINK from this all of you.

Jesus said what he meant, and he meant what he said.

Yeah it's like Matthew 5:28

when you look on a woman lustfully you are not committing adultery symbolically but actually doing it . same concept . different instance .

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Jig... I know you're a guy... best I could do on short notice.

Forgive me...