Posted on 09/17/2013 8:25:21 PM PDT by jodyel
No, I am not. And unless you can make a valid case for Catholicism using Scripture alone, you won’t change any minds here.
How are you an expert? Why should anyone pay attention to your attacks?
Yes, I got that shortly after posting.
Thank you.
Might want to stick to English.
Thank you for making my point precisely, narses.
So why would anyone pay attention to random websites or random posters like you? Whay, with specificity, makes you any kind of an expert?
Are you saying that God can do some miracles but is limited in the sorts of miracles he can perform? There is some entity above the God of the Scriptures who sets the rules for the God we know of? The Rosicrucians think they know about that stuff.
.
It is all answered long before Yeshua was even born. When The MelekZedek blessed Abraham, he spoke the same blessing that Yeshua spoke to his disciples at the last supper: “Blessed art thou Yehova Elohim, King of the Universe, that brings forth bread and wine on the Earth.”
There is no Eucharist; that is pagan blasphemy. Yeshua said that “it is spirit” in John 6:63. He said that the flesh profited nothing. The Papist “communion” makes the remembrance of our savior into vile blasphemy.
Unless, of course, he said something different.
Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye have not life in yourselves.- He does not here say "pretend to eat", etc.
"Take, eat, do this in memory of me." -Does your translation say "Take, eat, do a symbol of this in memory of me."
For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
Are you a Literalist?
>> “Are you saying that God can do some miracles but is limited in the sorts of miracles he can perform?” <<
.
That is a facetious question, that mocks what Yehova has revealed of himself, and his son in the word.
Yeshua has a body, and a body can be in only one place at one time. That is why he sent us the Holy Spirit as a comforter. The spirit can be with every other spirit; a body cannot.
It’s not a miracle, its satanic mockery of Yeshua and his sacrifice.
There is a difference between parables and plain statements. If you cannot discern such a difference then you could not know what things should be believed and what should not.
Are you so insecure in you Roman Catholic faith that you honestly feel someone quoting the Holy Bible to you is an attack?
>> “Unless, of course, he said something different.” <<
.
He said when asked for clarification “it is spirit.”
Take, eat, do this in memory of me is a symbol. Don’t tie your tongue in knots to mock our savior.
Even Augustine, writing on his “rule for interpreting commands,” calls the eating of Christ to be figurative, since otherwise it compels us to do something that is unlawful.
“If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, says Christ, and drink His blood, you have no life in you. John 6:53 This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share [communicandem] in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory [in memoria] of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us. Scripture says: If your enemy hungers, feed him; if he thirsts, give him drink; and this is beyond doubt a command to do a kindness. But in what follows, for in so doing you shall heap coals of fire on his head, one would think a deed of malevolence was enjoined. Do not doubt, then, that the expression is figurative; and, while it is possible to interpret it in two ways, one pointing to the doing of an injury, the other to a display of superiority, let charity on the contrary call you back to benevolence, and interpret the coals of fire as the burning groans of penitence by which a man’s pride is cured who bewails that he has been the enemy of one who came to his assistance in distress. In the same way, when our Lord says, He who loves his life shall lose it, we are not to think that He forbids the prudence with which it is a man’s duty to care for his life, but that He says in a figurative sense, Let him lose his life— that is, let him destroy and lose that perverted and unnatural use which he now makes of his life, and through which his desires are fixed on temporal things so that he gives no heed to eternal. It is written: Give to the godly man, and help not a sinner. The latter clause of this sentence seems to forbid benevolence; for it says, help not a sinner. Understand, therefore, that sinner is put figuratively for sin, so that it is his sin you are not to help.” (Augustine, Christian Doctrine, Ch. 16)
In another place, he tells us that it is weakness to interpret the sign as being what it signifies (for example, seeing in the Eucharist the actual body and blood of Christ, and not the sign of the body and blood of Christ).
“To this class of spiritual persons belonged the patriarchs and the prophets, and all those among the people of Israel through whose instrumentality the Holy Spirit ministered unto us the aids and consolations of the Scriptures. But at the present time, after that the proof of our liberty has shone forth so clearly in the resurrection of our Lord, we are not oppressed with the heavy burden of attending even to those signs which we now understand, but our Lord Himself, and apostolic practice, have handed down to us a few rites in place of many, and these at once very easy to perform, most majestic in their significance, and most sacred in the observance; such, for example, as the sacrament of baptism, and the celebration of the body and blood of the Lord. And as soon as any one looks upon these observances he knows to what they refer, and so reveres them not in carnal bondage, but in spiritual freedom. Now, as to follow the letter, and to take signs for the things that are signified by them, is a mark of weakness and bondage; so to interpret signs wrongly is the result of being misled by error. He, however, who does not understand what a sign signifies, but yet knows that it is a sign, is not in bondage. And it is better even to be in bondage to unknown but useful signs than, by interpreting them wrongly, to draw the neck from under the yoke of bondage only to insert it in the coils of error.” (Augustine, Christian Doctrine, Ch. 9)
In still another place, he calls referring to the Eucharist as the “body and blood of Christ” as only a “certain manner of speaking,” the act itself obviously being non-literal:
“You know that in ordinary parlance we often say, when Easter is approaching, Tomorrow or the day after is the Lord’s Passion, although He suffered so many years ago, and His passion was endured once for all time. In like manner, on Easter Sunday, we say, This day the Lord rose from the dead, although so many years have passed since His resurrection. But no one is so foolish as to accuse us of falsehood when we use these phrases, for this reason, that we give such names to these days on the ground of a likeness between them and the days on which the events referred to actually transpired, the day being called the day of that event, although it is not the very day on which the event took place, but one corresponding to it by the revolution of the same time of the year, and the event itself being said to take place on that day, because, although it really took place long before, it is on that day sacramentally celebrated. Was not Christ once for all offered up in His own person as a sacrifice? And yet, is He not likewise offered up in the sacrament as a sacrifice, not only in the special solemnities of Easter, but also daily among our congregations; so that the man who, being questioned, answers that He is offered as a sacrifice in that ordinance, declares what is strictly true? For if sacraments had not some points of real resemblance to the things of which they are the sacraments, they would not be sacraments at all. In most cases, moreover, they do in virtue of this likeness bear the names of the realities which they resemble. As, therefore, in a certain manner the sacrament of Christ’s body is Christ’s body, and the sacrament of Christ’s blood is Christ’s blood.” (Augustine, Letters 98)
In yet another place, Augustine concludes that Christ is eaten and drank through faith, without the readying of teeth and stomach.
“They said therefore unto Him, What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” For He had said to them, “œLabor not for the meat which perisheth, but for that which endureth unto eternal life.” “What shall we do?” they ask; by observing what, shall we be able to fulfill this precept? “Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on Him whom He has sent.” This is then to eat the meat, not that which perisheth, but that which endureth unto eternal life. To what purpose dost thou make ready teeth and stomach? Believe, and thou hast eaten already.” (Augustine, Tractate 25)
None of this is really all that profound, honestly. It’s just common sense upon reading the passage in their proper context, and thinking on them with a sound and rational mind.
>> “
Are you so insecure in you Roman Catholic faith that you honestly feel someone quoting the Holy Bible to you is an attack?” <<
.
Catholics have repeatedly refered to the posting of scriptures as “anti-catholic hate.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.