[Galveston1]

All this shows the great division between the RC and the rest of Christendom. We simply do not believe that the RC is THE Church. We believe that the Scriptures are our complete guide for all things spiritual; that no man has the right to change or add to them.
I don't want to appear hateful, so let me state here that I do not hate Catholics, I see them as deceived.
I personally firmly believe that the RC is one of the oldest, largest cults in the world.
What did the first Church look like? Its members healed the sick supernaturally, cast out devils, raised the dead (In come cases). They were given directions from God via the Holy Spirit by tongues & interpretatiion or by word of prophecy. They knew things because the Holy Spirit told them. You only find such things today in the pentecostal movement. (I agree that it is sorely diminished from the Book of Acts, but there are remnants where these things still take place.) For Bible reference see 1 Corinthians Ch 12.

Several major things cause me to reject the RC as the Church.
1. Their rejection of Scripture as absolute authority.
2. Their deification of Mary. (I honor Mary for her unique position in God's plan)
3. Their doctrine of trans substantiation; that the wafer and wine are ACTUALLY the body and blood of Jesus. If it is indeed the ACTUAL body and blood of Jesus, then it is an object of worship, and is a form of idolatry. (If you doubt it you need to read Charles Chiniquy's book)
Again, I repeat, I do not hate Catholics, and I find myself in agreement with DeMaria many times, but not here.

[Wangdoodle]

Several major things cause me to reject the RC as the Church.
1. Their rejection of Scripture as absolute authority.
2. Their deification of Mary. (I honor Mary for her unique position in God's plan)
3. Their doctrine of trans substantiation; that the wafer and wine are ACTUALLY the body and blood of Jesus. If it is indeed the ACTUAL body and blood of Jesus, then it is an object of worship, and is a form of idolatry. (If you doubt it you need to read Charles Chiniquy's book)
Again, I repeat, I do not hate Catholics, and I find myself in agreement with DeMaria many times, but not here.

1. Scripture alone is not supported by Scripture alone. And the Catholic Church determined the canon of Scripture.
2. The Catholic Church does not teach that Mary is divine.
3. The early Christians understood the Eucharist to be the body and blood of Christ.

They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110).

"For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (A.D. 110-165).

[Fr_Chuck]

Also one of the issues I don't think was addressed was for the first several hundred years there was no official "scripture" one church may have had one or two writings, another church had 4 or 5 but 2 of them were not the ones that were finally on the approved list. And for the first 20 and 30 years there was no written word at all.

The Church was always the beleivers and the spoken word of God. The written word gives us the guidline to compare out conduct and actions by, and to compare the actions of others to be sure they are following the word of God. But it is easy to see from the scripture that the Church was for more than any written word.

[Tj3]

Also one of the issues I don't think was addressed was for the first several hundred years there was no official "scripture" one church may have had one or two writings, another church had 4 or 5 but 2 of them were not the ones that were finally on the approved list. And for the first 20 and 30 years there was no written word at all.

We hear this a lot, but believers were never without scripture. For example:

2 Tim 3:14-15
14 But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
NKJV

Yes, this refers to the OT, but note that even in the OT we have everything that we needed to know about the gospel. The NT provides clarity regarding the fulfillment of the prophecy regarding the gospel but has not added anything which is not covered in the OT.

When Jesus Himself sought to validate a point of doctrine in discussion, where did He refer? To scripture. Do we then consider any source to be more authoritative than that which Jesus considered authoritative?

We are further commanded not to go beyond what was written:

1 Cor 4:6
6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other.
NKJV

Yes, men may preach and may speak on doctrine, but no man is permitted to go beyond what is written.

[sndbay]

"For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (A.D. 110-165).[/I]

This is the first time I have seen or heard the Catholic view point applied this way. It has always been contary to what my friend that are Catholic tell me. And the Lurtheran church too, that I have known. My Catholic friends have always added that the priest of the church is the only one that can make the request in prayer. That is why going to any other Christian church leaves me out of receiving what Christ offered. Which I strongly disagree.
Is it likely that different division has occurred in the Catholic church that changes thes from one teaching to another? I have seen this placement within the Lurtheran church.

With all this discussion, Amen to the agreement, that we do not hate the Catholic church or any Christian teaching of Truth. The belief of our Lord and Savior Christ. And to causion the stumblingblock of another is a sin . Making unclean what God has cleaned.

[arcura]

sndbay,
Justin was a priest. He could consecrated the bread and wine so that the Holy Spirit would change it into the body and blood of Christ Jesus just as other priests can.
Jesus is the high priest and it was He who commanded His priests (apostles) to do that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[sndbay]

My opinion and belief of this would be as the scriptures tell us..

1 Corinthians 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake [it], and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. 25 After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.

We are to eat and digest this all as Truth of the sacrifice Christ made, and belief in knowing Christ was worthy in delivering us forgiveness.

[N0help4u]

Yeah it doesn't clearly state if it is literally transfigured in the Catholic sense or symbolically

[sndbay]

By eating and drinking you are taking all in as being one in flesh with Christ.

Jesus talked of the water and drinking it. The water He had to offer.

[arcura]

sndbay,well said,'Here is what Jesus said...
John4:7. When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, "Give me something to drink."
8. His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.
9. The Samaritan woman said to him, "You are a Jew. How is it that you ask me, a Samaritan, for something to drink?", Jews, of course, do not associate with Samaritans.
10. Jesus replied to her:
If you only knew what God is offering
And who it is that is saying to you,
`Give me something to drink,"
you would have been the one to ask,
and he would have given you living water.

11. `You have no bucket, sir," she answered, "and the well is deep: how do you get this living water?
12. Are you a greater man than our father Jacob, who gave us this well and drank from it himself with his sons and his cattle?"
13. Jesus replied:
Whoever drinks this water
Will be thirsty again;

14. But no one who drinks the water that I shall give
Will ever be thirsty again:
The water that I shall give
Will become a spring of water within, welling up for eternal life.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

[Tj3]

sndbay,
Justin was a priest. He could consecrated the bread and wine so that the Holy Spirit would change it into the body and blood of Christ Jesus just as other priests can.
Jesus is the high priest and it was He who commanded His priests (apostles) to do that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Where did Jesus command priests to "change it into the body and blood of Christ Jesus"? Could you quote us that passage of scripture?

Please also note that I am also a priest, as are all those who have been saved through the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, and who have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

1 Peter 2:9-10
9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.
NKJV

The separate priesthood required by the Old Covenant which provided mediators between men and God was done away with by the sacrifice on the cross. We who are saved now are able to go directly to throne of the Father in the name of Jesus, who is our high priest.

Heb 3:1-3
3:1 Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus, 2 who was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was faithful in all His house.
NKJV

The Apostles were a special group of men, and scripture tells us that there were only 12 of them (for example Rev 21:14)

[arcura]

Tj3,
To answer your question…….
Luke 22:14. When the time came he took his place at table, and the apostles with him.
15. And he said to them, "I have ardently longed to eat this Passover with you before I suffer;
16. because, I tell you, I shall not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God."
17. Then, taking a cup, he gave thanks and said, "Take this and share it among you,
18. because from now on, I tell you, I shall never again drink wine until the kingdom of God comes."
19. Then he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."
20. He did the same with the cup after supper, and said, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood poured out for you.
Also this which shows that the consecrated bread and wine becomes Christ’s body and blood.
John 6: 48. I am the bread of life.
49. Your fathers ate manna in the desert and they are dead;
50. but this is the bread which comes down from heaven,
so that a person may eat it and not die.
51. I am the living bread which has come down from heaven.
Anyone who eats this bread will live for ever; and the bread that I shall give is my flesh, for the life of the world."
52. Then the Jews started arguing among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"
53. Jesus replied to them: “In all truth I tell you, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
54. Anyone who does eat my flesh and drink my blood has eternal life, and I shall raise that person up on the last day.
55. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.
56. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I live in that person.
57. As the living Father sent me and I draw life from the Father, so whoever eats me will also draw life from me.
58. This is the bread which has come down from heaven;
It is not like the bread our ancestors ate: they are dead, but anyone who eats this bread will live for ever. “
And this which affirms that the bread and wine do become the body and blood of Christ Jesus.
1 Corin. 10: 14. For that reason, my dear friends, have nothing to do with the worship of false gods.
15. I am talking to you as sensible people; weigh up for yourselves what I have to say.
16. The blessing-cup, which we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of Christ; and the loaf of bread which we break, is it not a sharing in the body of Christ?
17. And as there is one loaf, so we, although there are many of us, are one single body, for we all share in the one loaf.
18. Now compare the natural people of Israel: is it not true that those who eat the sacrifices share the altar?
19. What does this mean? That the dedication of food to false gods amounts to anything? Or that false gods themselves amount to anything?
20. No, it does not; simply that when pagans sacrifice, what is sacrificed by them is sacrificed to demons who are not God. I do not want you to share with demons.
21. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons as well; you cannot have a share at the Lord's table and the demons' table as well.
22. Do we really want to arouse the Lord's jealousy; are we stronger than he is?
:) :) Peace and kindness,:)
Fred (arcura)

[Tj3]

Fred,

First, nothing that you posted commanded priest to change the bread and wine, but nonetheless, let's go on.

I note that you omitted large parts of John 6. Let's look at this more closely.

He said in different ways that he is the bread that came from heaven but they did not appear to understand or believe.

John 6:42-47
43 Jesus therefore answered and said to them, "Do not murmur among yourselves. 44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me. 46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.
NKJV

Note that Jesus says that He is the bread of life and that whosoever eats that bread shall live and not die. Further, we are told that those who ate the flesh in the wilderness died. The bread in the desert, the manna, was simply symbolic of Jesus, with Jesus being the true bread of life.

John 6:47-56
47 Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world." 52 The Jews therefore quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?" 53 Then Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, 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 Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed.
NKJV

Jesus says that we need to eat his flesh and drink his blood, and if we do, we receive eternal life. We need to read the full context and not just stop here if we need to find if indeed this is referring to actual human flesh and blood.

John 6:54-61
55 For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. 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 feeds on Me will live because of Me. 58 This is the bread which came down from heaven--not as your fathers ate the manna, and are dead. He who eats this bread will live forever." 59 These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum. 60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, "This is a hard saying; who can understand it?"
NKJV

Eating the flesh that Jesus speaks of and eating the blood means that we abide in Jesus and will live forever. Note: Taken literally, up to this point, this appears to provide a second means of salvation – if we were to eat His flesh and drink His blood, we gain eternal life. Is that what is meant? If we were to stop here, it would appear that the Catholics are right. But to stop without reading the full context would not be using sound Biblical exegesis, so lets continue on.

John 6:60-64
61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, "Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.
NKJV

Now Jesus now says that the flesh profits nothing. This appears contrary to verses 53-4 that state that we need to eat his flesh and drink his blood, and if we do, we receive eternal life, but then Jesus clarifies by stating that Jesus says that the words are the spirit and the life. This is why it is important to continue on and read the full context because Jesus has just struck to the very heart of the doctrine of transubstantiation by saying that the flesh does not profit us at all. Rather He says, that the life comes from the spirit, not the flesh and it is the words that bring the spirit.

Words = spirit = life, Flesh does not profit anything.

This is in harmony with what Jesus said in Matthew chapter 4:

Matt 4:3-4
3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. 4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
KJV

It is God's word that brings life and the spirit, not eating the flesh. Therefore, even if the bread were changed to flesh, there would be no benefit from eating it. Now, remember earlier in this document, it was noted that human flesh and blood do perish and yet the bread that Jesus offered did not perish? Here is the explanation. Jesus was not speaking of bread, or of blood or of flesh but was speaking of the words of God which bring life. God word and the life which comes from God's word (the Gospel) are eternal. Bread, flesh and blood are perishable, but God's word and salvation which comes from receiving the gospel are eternal.

64a But there are some of you who do not believe.

Some do not believe that the flesh profits nothing rather and thus do not believe that it is His words that give the spirit and life. If they do not believe that the flesh profits nothing, then they must believe that it is the flesh rather than His words that He is speaking about.

64b For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him.

And some as a result, they will betray him.

63 And He said, "Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father." 64 But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. 65 And He said, "Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father." 66 From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more. 67 Then Jesus said to the twelve, "Do you also want to go away?"

68 But Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

The Apostles remain true and believe that the flesh profits nothing but rather believe in His words for the spirit and life. What could be the words that Jesus speaks which bring life? It is the words of truth, the truth of who He is, the truth or why He came to earth in the flesh and the words that give us the truth of the gospel, the only words which can bring us eternal life. Those who believed that He was speaking about the actual eating of flesh and drinking of blood missed the point of the gospel and were not saved. Those who stayed understood that without a sacrifice and without the shedding of blood, there was no remission of sins, and that Jesus was the lamb of God, sent to be the ultimate sacrifice, the only sacrifice which could actually take away sins and restore us to a right relationship with God.

There are numerous problems with interpreting this passage as supporting transubstantiation. Some of these problems are:

1) Jesus clear and specific words that explain this as not having anything to do with the actual flesh.

2) Jesus is using this to exhort those who profess to follow Him to digest His words, not His flesh.

3) Those who believed that He was teaching cannibalism (eating the flesh and drinking the blood) were the ones who turned away from Jesus. Those who understood that this had nothing to do with consuming human flesh and blood stayed with Jesus.

Ironically, by promoting this passage as promoting the eating of flesh and drinking of blood, the belief in transubstantiation actually turns against the actual teaching of Christ, which was to digest His words because they are the source of life and instead they turn away from His clear teachings in John 6 and insist that it is necessary to eat His flesh. Instead of looking towards that bread which never perishes and brings eternal life, the word of God, the gospel, the doctrine of transubstantiation looks for eternal life in that which is perishable, bread, wine, flesh and blood.

[arcura]

Tj3,
If Jesus said to do it, to me that means to DO IT.
He said, "Do this to remember (or recall) me"
He said it to His apostles, no one else.
What you posted of John does not change the point I was making.
Thanks for your effort though it will not change what the bible clearly says.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

[N0help4u]

I still don't see where it means it is not a spiritual (symbolic) term but a transubstantiation
To drink his blood and eat his flesh.

[Tj3]

Tj3,
If Jesus said to do it, to me that means to DO IT.
He said, "Do this to remember (or recall) me"
He said it to His apostles, no one else.
What you posted of John does not change the point I was making.
Thanks for your effort though it will not change what the bible clearly says.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

I agree that if Jesus says to do it, that we should do it.

My question was, where does He command priests to change the substance of wine and bread? In John 6, Jesus said specifically that he does NOT means for use to eat actual flesh. You did not answer this question.

And you are right, He says to do this in remembrance (symbolic) of Him.

Lastly, if you are suggesting that because He said it to His Apostles alone that that means that it does not apply to anyone else, then it would undermine your point since there were only 12 Apostles.

[sndbay]

Fred I have to agree with TJ3.. You are speaking of a teaching that comes from your church. Who also believes the church can take away from the individual, his right to receive the body and blood from whom they feel should not have it.
Like TJ3 said the Bread and Body that Christ speaks of is that which can not be stolen or lost if the individual remains stedfast in his love and belief in Christ. The individual must find Christ worthy . He is the Treasure..

There are scripture that strengthen this fact.

This contrary debate is found throughout several exact symbolic teaching that Christ has spoken of.. The water , The Rock, and now the Body and Blood.

Jeremiah 59:6 My people hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have caused them to go astray, they have turned them away [on] the mountains: they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their restingplace.

Where do Christains find their resting place? In Christ

[sndbay]

Tj3,
If Jesus said to do it, to me that means to DO IT.
He said, "Do this to remember (or recall) me"
He said it to His apostles, no one else.
What you posted of John does not change the point I was making.
Thanks for your effort though it will not change what the bible clearly says.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

Christ did tell the apostles this, and the Apostles are the small stone of the Rock. Christ said feed my sheep to the apostles.. Christ was talking about the apostles feeding us His Word and Truth.

This forum does not fill me with what Christ has offered. Instead it puts stumblingblocks before each, and cast stone upon the Truth. This is not what Christians partake of, nor do I intend to continue. Hearing false teaching. There are forum available that teach the Word of God. TheSeason.Org

[Galveston1]

If you are going to argue that Jesus gave His Apostles REAL blood to drink, then He would have been guilty of sin according to the Law. You know that is not so, therefore your argument falls on its face.

[arcura]

Galviston1,
Not so.
Jesus did say that this IS, my body, this IS my blood.
I believe what God the son said.
Jesus blood is divine blood, not any ordinary kind.
God is the law giver. If He says to eat His Body and Drink His blood then so be it and millions of people have been doing so for 2000 years.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)