Transubstantiation is a Catholic lie

Transubstantiation is a Catholic lie

Posted in the Axton Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#1 Jul 11, 2014
John 6:48,

>>> I am the bread of life <<<

Jesus continues,

>>> I am the living bread **which came down from heaven** If any man eat of this bread" **which came down from heaven** he shall live forever <<<

>>> and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world <<<

When Jesus said this, the Jews thought Jesus meant eat his flesh literally, likewise the mistake made of the Roman Catholic Church.

They ask Jesus,

>>> How can this man give us flesh to eat <<<

Jesus said,

>>> Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you <<<

He proceeds,

>>> He who eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, has eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day <<<

>>> He who believes on him, receives him, follows him, loves him and obeys him, in the sense he intended, eats his flesh and drinks his blood; but not in the communion any more than in the
other part of his teaching, or other appointments. In coming to Christ, and becoming his disciples, we are made partakers of him, of "the divine nature" and our salvation is in him.

verse 58,

>>> As the living Father has sent me, and I live by the Father, so he that eats me, even he shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven <<<

>>> not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead; he who eats this bread shall live forever <<<

Eating of Christ simply means P AR T A K I N G in him in the sense that we come by the gift of faith, following and obeying him. The bread he GAVE was his flesh upon a cross bleed for our forgiveness, raised and seated in heaven as our mediator between God and man. When we sit in communion we do so in remembrance of this. We do not act as though each Lord’s supper he continues to forgive sins as we partake in the bread and wine. He died for sins ONCE and not to be compared nor treated like that of bulls and goats. In the Eucharist we commune as a family in remembrance of Jesus taking away our sins with his flesh and blood.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#2 Jul 11, 2014
Calvins Corner wrote:
John 6:48,
>>> I am the bread of life <<<
Jesus continues,
>>> I am the living bread **which came down from heaven** If any man eat of this bread" **which came down from heaven** he shall live forever <<<
>>> and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world <<<
When Jesus said this, the Jews thought Jesus meant eat his flesh literally, likewise the mistake made of the Roman Catholic Church.
They ask Jesus,
>>> How can this man give us flesh to eat <<<
Jesus said,
>>> Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you <<<
He proceeds,
>>> He who eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, has eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day <<<
>>> He who believes on him, receives him, follows him, loves him and obeys him, in the sense he intended, eats his flesh and drinks his blood; but not in the communion any more than in the
other part of his teaching, or other appointments. In coming to Christ, and becoming his disciples, we are made partakers of him, of "the divine nature" and our salvation is in him.
verse 58,
>>> As the living Father has sent me, and I live by the Father, so he that eats me, even he shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven <<<
>>> not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead; he who eats this bread shall live forever <<<
Eating of Christ simply means P AR T A K I N G in him in the sense that we come by the gift of faith, following and obeying him. The bread he GAVE was his flesh upon a cross bleed for our forgiveness, raised and seated in heaven as our mediator between God and man. When we sit in communion we do so in remembrance of this. We do not act as though each Lord’s supper he continues to forgive sins as we partake in the bread and wine. He died for sins ONCE and not to be compared nor treated like that of bulls and goats. In the Eucharist we commune as a family in remembrance of Jesus taking away our sins with his flesh and blood.
Then why John 6:66. You just wasted your time with that crap. Before they left him they were murmuring about what he was saying. He basically told them to shut up and listen.

Why don't you just shut up and listen too.

Eating my flesh and drinking my blood is very straight forward. The only reason you don't believe this is because the Church does.

In fact, most protesters interpret the Bible that way. That is why they are called Protesters. Whatever the Church teaches protesters teach differently.

With the low ends since 1800, they have to be careful They protest against other protesters and have to be careful not to agree with the Church.

They have to be more imaginative.

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#3 Jul 11, 2014
There is nothing in that text at all that supports a literal eating of Jesus’ flesh and blood.

In the Eucharist we partake in remembrance of what?

Try as you may but you have no grounds at all to support your false teaching.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#4 Jul 11, 2014
Calvins Corner wrote:
There is nothing in that text at all that supports a literal eating of Jesus’ flesh and blood.
In the Eucharist we partake in remembrance of what?
Try as you may but you have no grounds at all to support your false teaching.
According to you, whose opinion of scripture and tradition is important to only you and will die when you do.

The Church will be here until the end of ages. It is the pillar and foundation of truth.
Dave P

Grayson, KY

#5 Jul 11, 2014
The church of Christ has to be extremely careful because their teaching is catholic lite. Baptism is close but not exact, communion is close but not exact, MDR is basically the same.
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#6 Jul 11, 2014
Calvins Corner wrote:
There is nothing in that text at all that supports a literal eating of Jesus’ flesh and blood.
In the Eucharist we partake in remembrance of what?
Try as you may but you have no grounds at all to support your false teaching.
Yes, communion is symbolic. Even the catholics know they cannot actually eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus. So they turned it into a supposed act where Jesus supposedly turns a cracker into flesh and wine into blood. We know that Jesus has that power. So it would be just as easy for him to change the elements we use into his actual blood and flesh before we take the elements.

I absolutely believe that the elements are meant to be symbols. This reminds me of the some of the hardline coc who believe they literally contact the blood of Christ while in the baptismal water-they must have gotten that idea from catholics.

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#7 Jul 11, 2014
Jesus shed his blood once on a cross no more in water and no more in the Eucharist. Where I wonder was Jesus blood presented. Did his blood all shed to the earth and soaked up by the soil or was his blood presented to the Father. Think on this with the Old sacrificial system in mind. Not for one second do I believe Jesus blood wasted to the ground although it may landed there. Just saying.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#8 Jul 11, 2014
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, communion is symbolic. Even the catholics know they cannot actually eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus. So they turned it into a supposed act where Jesus supposedly turns a cracker into flesh and wine into blood. We know that Jesus has that power. So it would be just as easy for him to change the elements we use into his actual blood and flesh before we take the elements.
I absolutely believe that the elements are meant to be symbols. This reminds me of the some of the hardline coc who believe they literally contact the blood of Christ while in the baptismal water-they must have gotten that idea from catholics.
Please show me in the Bible where Jesus said eating his flesh and drinking his blood was symbolic.

It is unbiblical to think it was a symbol.

In reality, scripture says THIS about the Eucharist:

In reality, scripture says THIS about the Eucharist:

John 6:[48] I am the bread of life.

[49] Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died.

[50] This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die.

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

[52]The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"

[53] So Jesus said to them, "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;

[54] he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.(The Greek word here for "eats" means to "munch on", or to "gnaw on.")
[55] For my flesh is REAL FOOD, and my blood is REAL DRINK.(Notice how Jesus says the Eucharist is REAL FOOD and REAL DRINK, not symbolic food and drink!)
[56] He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
[57] As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.
[58] This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever."

Many of his disciples left him over this, because they knew that he wasn't speaking metaphorically, but literally. We know from Mark 4:34 that Jesus explained all of His parables to His disciples, but yet here they are leaving him after this speech about the Eucharist. The only conclusion logical people can draw is that THIS IS NO PARABLE!

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#9 Jul 11, 2014
Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
Please show me in the Bible where Jesus said eating his flesh and drinking his blood was symbolic.
What does the wine REPRESENT?

What does the bread REPRESENT?
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#10 Jul 11, 2014
Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
Please show me in the Bible where Jesus said eating his flesh and drinking his blood was symbolic.
It is unbiblical to think it was a symbol.
In reality, scripture says THIS about the Eucharist:
In reality, scripture says THIS about the Eucharist:
John 6:[48] I am the bread of life.
[49] Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died.
[50] This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die.
[51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."
[52]The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"
[53] So Jesus said to them, "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;
[54] he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.(The Greek word here for "eats" means to "munch on", or to "gnaw on.")
[55] For my flesh is REAL FOOD, and my blood is REAL DRINK.(Notice how Jesus says the Eucharist is REAL FOOD and REAL DRINK, not symbolic food and drink!)
[56] He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
[57] As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.
[58] This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever."
Many of his disciples left him over this, because they knew that he wasn't speaking metaphorically, but literally. We know from Mark 4:34 that Jesus explained all of His parables to His disciples, but yet here they are leaving him after this speech about the Eucharist. The only conclusion logical people can draw is that THIS IS NO PARABLE!
The Bible condemns the eating of blood, the drinking of blood. Deuteronomy is very clear on that.

You should know, this:, "Augustine, St. Augustine to Catholics, he didn’t agree with transubstantiation, that you literally even under the appearance of a the elements being under the appearance of bread and wine became the actual body and blood of Jesus, because he felt eating somebody’s flesh was evil and where he understood something to be evil he couldn’t take it literally."

So, it must be taken spiritually, or figuratively/symbolic.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#11 Jul 11, 2014
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible condemns the eating of blood, the drinking of blood. Deuteronomy is very clear on that.
You should know, this:, "Augustine, St. Augustine to Catholics, he didn’t agree with transubstantiation, that you literally even under the appearance of a the elements being under the appearance of bread and wine became the actual body and blood of Jesus, because he felt eating somebody’s flesh was evil and where he understood something to be evil he couldn’t take it literally."
So, it must be taken spiritually, or figuratively/symbolic.
I know you are not intentionally lying because you have no clue.

Look up these writings from one of the greatest Christians of all time. St Augustine.

"Christ was carried in his own hands when, referring to his own body, he said,‘This is my body’[Matt. 26:26]. For he carried that body in his hands" (Exp. of the Psalms 33:1:10)

"I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table.... That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ" (Ser. 227)

"What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith; yet faith does not desire instruction" (Ser. 272)

"The Lord Jesus wanted those whose eyes were held lest they should recognize him, to recognize Him in the breaking of the bread [Luke 24:16, 30-35]. The faithful know what I am saying. They know Christ in the breaking of the bread. For not all bread, but only that which receives the blessing of Christ, becomes Christ’s body." (Ser. 232)
William

Huntsville, AL

#12 Jul 11, 2014
Warmed-over Judaism.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#13 Jul 11, 2014
William wrote:
Warmed-over Judaism.
Didn't your daddy teach you Jesus was a Jew.

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#14 Jul 11, 2014
Mike,

What does the wine REPRESENT?

What does the bread REPRESENT?

Mike knows if he says what they REPRESENT that it gives way to symbolism.

William is right. Warmed over Judaism.

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#15 Jul 11, 2014
People of this discussion board I have been up almost 24 hours and must get some needed rest. Carry on.

I pray that Mike wakes to the truth and looks before Catholic history as it be our sole source and rule of faith that being the bible.

God speed to you all. I will check back after some much needed rest.
God bless
Mike_Peterson

Jackson, MS

#16 Jul 12, 2014
Calvins Corner wrote:
People of this discussion board I have been up almost 24 hours and must get some needed rest. Carry on.

I pray that Mike wakes to the truth and looks before Catholic history as it be our sole source and rule of faith that being the bible.

God speed to you all. I will check back after some much needed rest.
God bless
You think the Bible existed before the Church??

I guess you think the first Christians all carried a Bible around with them

Since: Jul 14

Location hidden

#17 Jul 13, 2014
Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
You think the Bible existed before the Church??
I guess you think the first Christians all carried a Bible around with them
I am not a bible worshiper I worship God who gave us his word. Jesus said IT IS WRITTEN. That's very strange of him if I bury my head in the Catholic sand.
Mike_Peterson

Pearl, MS

#18 Jul 13, 2014
Calvins Corner wrote:
<quoted text>I am not a bible worshiper I worship God who gave us his word. Jesus said IT IS WRITTEN. That's very strange of him if I bury my head in the Catholic sand.
Sure you do. All protesters do. A book. Think about that. You worship yourself first then the Bible. SS baby. I worship the bible the right wAy and everybody that disagrees is lost.
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#19 Jul 13, 2014
Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure you do. All protesters do. A book. Think about that. You worship yourself first then the Bible. SS baby. I worship the bible the right wAy and everybody that disagrees is lost.
Mike worships this and that...
Mike_Peterson

Pearl, MS

#20 Jul 13, 2014
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>Mike worships this and that...
The Bible is That/And.

Non catholic ecclesial community members pick out the ones that match their beliefs and ignore or use their ignorance to twist the ones that don't
match up with the agreement they made with Jesus when they let him be their Lord and Savior.

I love that when Jesus told the Apostles whatever sins you forgive are forgiven in heaven doesn't mean that according to Calvin.

That's a keeper.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Axton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
thomas jefferson edwards (Apr '16) Oct '16 NUKS67 3
THE CHILDREN of THE GOD MOST HIGH (May '14) Oct '16 randy 5
Martinsville Seven - The Martinsville Curse (Mar '10) Oct '16 Santiago Ramey 10
Nickname of Stick Oct '16 A friend 1
Easter Auto Sales (Feb '12) Oct '16 donnawyattreed 9
Dawn Mills Oct '16 Alan Nolan 1
Worship vs Service (Sep '10) Oct '16 Openbook7 7

Axton Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Axton Mortgages