Transubstantiation: a Catholic lie

Transubstantiation: a Catholic lie

Posted in the Martinsville Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: Aug 14

Nigeria, Africa

#1 Aug 14, 2014
In reading John 6, Catholics say, one part, Jesus spoke metaphorically, and within the same context, He also spoke as a literalist, meaning He was merely using ‘play on words’ when He spoke of eating the words from the mouth of God BUUUTTT when He spoke of eating His flesh, He meant that literally.

Taking this approach, how do Catholics understand John 10:9 ("I am the door") and John 15:1 ("I am the true vine")? Is Jesus a literal door? Literal vine?

Paul to the Corinthians said: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" (1 Cor. 10:16). Notice, Paul did not say: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the very blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the very body of Christ”. Rather, Paul said, we “participate”, meaning the act of communion is in participation in the remembrance of Jesus which is exampled in Luke 22:19.

Luke 22:19 ► Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "THIS IS MY BODY given for you; do this in remembrance of me”.

Pay careful attention here.

Was Jesus eating His actual Body? After all, He said, THIS IS MY BODY … referring to the bread He broke.

Was Jesus using elements of symbolism or was He speaking in literal terms?

If the Catholics make John 6:53–56 have a literal meaning, why not Luke 22:19?

Furthermore, in John 6, Jesus speaks of eating the words from the mouth of God. Is Jesus speaking metaphorically here but speaking literally when he speaks of eating His body?
Bobby

Mansfield, TX

#2 Aug 14, 2014
Jimmy-Crack-Corn wrote:
In reading John 6, Catholics say, one part, Jesus spoke metaphorically, and within the same context, He also spoke as a literalist, meaning He was merely using ‘play on words’ when He spoke of eating the words from the mouth of God BUUUTTT when He spoke of eating His flesh, He meant that literally.
Taking this approach, how do Catholics understand John 10:9 ("I am the door") and John 15:1 ("I am the true vine")? Is Jesus a literal door? Literal vine?
Paul to the Corinthians said: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" (1 Cor. 10:16). Notice, Paul did not say: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the very blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the very body of Christ”. Rather, Paul said, we “participate”, meaning the act of communion is in participation in the remembrance of Jesus which is exampled in Luke 22:19.
Luke 22:19 ► Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "THIS IS MY BODY given for you; do this in remembrance of me”.
Pay careful attention here.
Was Jesus eating His actual Body? After all, He said, THIS IS MY BODY … referring to the bread He broke.
Was Jesus using elements of symbolism or was He speaking in literal terms?
If the Catholics make John 6:53–56 have a literal meaning, why not Luke 22:19?
Furthermore, in John 6, Jesus speaks of eating the words from the mouth of God. Is Jesus speaking metaphorically here but speaking literally when he speaks of eating His body?
Then they require a qualified priest to administer it. It has become a very convenient way to keep the people coming to church.

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#3 Aug 14, 2014
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>
Then they require a qualified priest to administer it. It has become a very convenient way to keep the people coming to church.
You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
It is called a successor to the Apostles just like in the Bible.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#4 Aug 14, 2014
Jimmy-Crack-Corn wrote:
In reading John 6, Catholics say, one part, Jesus spoke metaphorically, and within the same context, He also spoke as a literalist, meaning He was merely using ‘play on words’ when He spoke of eating the words from the mouth of God BUUUTTT when He spoke of eating His flesh, He meant that literally.
Taking this approach, how do Catholics understand John 10:9 ("I am the door") and John 15:1 ("I am the true vine")? Is Jesus a literal door? Literal vine?
Paul to the Corinthians said: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" (1 Cor. 10:16). Notice, Paul did not say: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the very blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the very body of Christ”. Rather, Paul said, we “participate”, meaning the act of communion is in participation in the remembrance of Jesus which is exampled in Luke 22:19.
Luke 22:19 &#9658; Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "THIS IS MY BODY given for you; do this in remembrance of me”.
Pay careful attention here.
Was Jesus eating His actual Body? After all, He said, THIS IS MY BODY … referring to the bread He broke.
Was Jesus using elements of symbolism or was He speaking in literal terms?
If the Catholics make John 6:53–56 have a literal meaning, why not Luke 22:19?
Furthermore, in John 6, Jesus speaks of eating the words from the mouth of God. Is Jesus speaking metaphorically here but speaking literally when he speaks of eating His body?
Still going on. Just substitute Protesters for Jews?

The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying,“How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?”

53
Jesus said to them,“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.
54
Whoever eats* my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55
For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
57
Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.b
58
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.”
59
These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#5 Aug 14, 2014
This is the only record we have of any of Christ’s followers forsaking him for purely doctrinal reasons. If it had all been a misunderstanding, if they erred in taking a metaphor in a literal sense, why didn’t he call them back and straighten things out? Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood." John 6 was an extended promise of what would be instituted at the Last Supper—and it was a promise that could not be more explicit.
Bobby

Mansfield, TX

#6 Aug 14, 2014
Just substitute catholics for Jews. where are you william?
Mike_Peterson

Pearl, MS

#7 Aug 14, 2014
Bobby wrote:
Just substitute catholics for Jews. where are you william?
You are like the Jews. Still quarreling among yourselves
William

Birmingham, AL

#8 Aug 14, 2014
Bobby wrote:
Just substitute catholics for Jews. Where are you William?
Jews always required a sign. Always.

We, however, are to walk by faith, not by sight. No need for Sunday morning magic shows.
Mike_Peterson

Pearl, MS

#9 Aug 14, 2014
William wrote:
<quoted text>Jews always required a sign. Always.

We, however, are to walk by faith, not by sight. No need for Sunday morning magic shows.
Still quarreling.
William

Birmingham, AL

#10 Aug 14, 2014
Mike_Peterson wrote:
Still quarreling.
I'm not. I'm complete in Christ, so there isn't anything to quarrel over.

Especially the need for a Sunday morning magic show with juice and crackers.

Asinine.
Bobby

Mansfield, TX

#11 Aug 14, 2014
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

It seems that peter forgot to mention that he was the rock that the church is built on.
Bobby

Mansfield, TX

#12 Aug 14, 2014
Peter never claimed that he was a pope. Why? because it ain't true.
Jimmy Crack Corn

Fremont, CA

#13 Aug 14, 2014
Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
It is called a successor to the Apostles just like in the Bible.
Let's play it one more time, Mike.
#
Mike_Peterson

Pearl, MS

#14 Aug 14, 2014
William wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not. I'm complete in Christ, so there isn't anything to quarrel over.

Especially the need for a Sunday morning magic show with juice and crackers.

Asinine.
You will quarrel with Jesus on this one until you die?

All Christians did not quarrel with Jesus on this for 1500 years.

You Prots picked this quarrel back up then.

Mike_Peterson

Pearl, MS

#15 Aug 14, 2014
Bobby wrote:
Peter never claimed that he was a pope. Why? because it ain't true.
Sure he did. Jesus built his Church on St Peter.

Only St Peter's sermon was recorded on Pentecost. He decided to replace Judas.

The people would place their sick in the street so his shadow would pass over them and they would be healed

God killed a husband and his wife for lying to him. Why?

Jesus gave him all authority and the Church is still here 2000 years later.

Meantime you protesters protest against each other more than the Church [and quarrel about how Jesus wants us to eat his body and drink his blood.

And you constantly try to steal each other's members because you are right and they are wrong
Mike_Peterson

Pearl, MS

#16 Aug 14, 2014
William wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not. I'm complete in Christ, so there isn't anything to quarrel over.

Especially the need for a Sunday morning magic show with juice and crackers.

Asinine.
Are you working out your salvation with fear and trembling like Paul?

Why did he say the wages of sin is death when he was writing to the members of the church.?
Bobby

Mansfield, TX

#17 Aug 14, 2014
The people would place their sick in the street so his shadow would pass over them and they would be healed.

Wonder why no one in any church, protestant or catholic has never been able to do that-now that is funny. Of course there are lots of fakes who claim to... And people gullible enough to believe it.

That said, I believe in miracles but, Jesus is the power source not mere men.

Catholics work hard to attribute miracles to their popes-it ain't so...
Bobby

Mansfield, TX

#18 Aug 14, 2014
When catholics create a false doctrine, they must also create fake miracles...

Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
William

Birmingham, AL

#19 Aug 15, 2014
Mike_Peterson wrote:
Are you working out your salvation with fear and trembling like Paul?

Why did he say the wages of sin is death when he was writing to the members of the church?
Already worked it out.
Bobby

Mansfield, TX

#20 Aug 15, 2014
Mike and Barnsweb are no longer sinners-that is why they brag so much.

Both have kept all of those 613 old covenant laws-now they can relax.

Hurry up st peter, I am not sure how long I can keep this up!

28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me,is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

He did not say part time salvation-saved today lost tomorrow.

Saint perter don't call yet, cause I can't go, I haven't paid my debt yet...

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.

Martinsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Refuting Preterism Wed Mike Peters 1
Martinsville Seven - The Martinsville Curse (Mar '10) Aug 28 Woodstock69 7
Catholics (Feb '14) Aug 25 Barnsweb 2,918
'Bible Study' Group Aug 24 Mike_Peterson 23
Church of Christ rules and principles (Apr '13) Aug 17 Barnsweb 305
Johnny Robertson’s church of Christ (Feb '13) Aug 13 Barnsweb 161
Christians Murder American Indians (Jan '12) Aug 9 Walkinginlove 24
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Martinsville Mortgages