Transubstantiation. What is it?

[amigo de christo]

Jesus also said that he was the bread of life, John 6:48. Why is it that Catholics don't say much about Jesus being "The bread of Life?" Jesus said, "I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world" John 6:51. This scripture is about Jesus atoning for the sins of the world, It is not really about eating anything. I believe that eating really means believing. When we believe in Jesus it is symbolic of eating. We spiritually become in union with him, otherwise it is cannibalism.

The whole idea behind the Catholic Eucharist is to become more like Jesus, instead of trusting in him. If I eat his flesh and drink his blood, I will be like him. No one can ever become like Jesus because everyone is a sinner, born after Adam. Romans 5:12.

Cause to them the words of the pope and vatican are spirit and they are life . EAT A WAFER and SHUT UP people
just heed the church , but oh dear the end of them wont bode well on the day of the LORD . do keep that in mind .

 

[Cassandra]

Cause to them the words of the pope and vatican are spirit and they are life . EAT A WAFER and SHUT UP people
just heed the church , but oh dear the end of them wont bode well on the day of the LORD . do keep that in mind .

Many Catholics, as well as other denominations, will be saved. Quit condemning everyone.

 

[Augustin56]

Jesus also said that he was the bread of life, John 6:48. Why is it that Catholics don't say much about Jesus being "The bread of Life?" Jesus said, "I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world" John 6:51. This scripture is about Jesus atoning for the sins of the world, It is not really about eating anything. I believe that eating really means believing. When we believe in Jesus it is symbolic of eating. We spiritually become in union with him, otherwise it is cannibalism.

The whole idea behind the Catholic Eucharist is to become more like Jesus, instead of trusting in him. If I eat his flesh and drink his blood, I will be like him. No one can ever become like Jesus because everyone is a sinner, born after Adam. Romans 5:12.

Again, you are giving your personal interpretation, filtered through modern world lenses. The Early Church Christians, the first Christians, believed that the Eucharist was really the Body and Blood of Our Savior.

Even Protestant historians show that. The doctrine of the Real Presence asserts that in the Holy Eucharist Jesus is literally and wholly present—body and blood, soul and divinity—under the appearances of bread and wine. Many Protestants attack this doctrine as “unbiblical,” but the Bible is forthright in declaring it (cf. 1 Cor. 10:16–17, 11:23–29; and, most forcefully, John 6:32–71).

The Early Church Fathers interpreted these passages literally. In summarizing the early Fathers’ teachings on Christ’s Real Presence, renowned Protestant historian of the early Church J. N. D. Kelly, writes: “Eucharistic teaching, it should be understood at the outset, was in general unquestioningly realist, i.e., the consecrated bread and wine were taken to be, and were treated and designated as, the Savior’s body and blood” (Early Christian Doctrines, 440).

From the Church’s early days, the Fathers referred to Christ’s presence in the Eucharist. Kelly writes: “Ignatius roundly declares that . . .the bread is the flesh of Jesus, the cup his blood. Clearly he intends this realism to be taken strictly, for he makes it the basis of his argument against the Docetists’ denial of the reality of Christ’s body. . . . Irenaeus teaches that the bread and wine are really the Lord’s body and blood. His witness is, indeed, all the more impressive because he produces it quite incidentally while refuting the Gnostic and Docetic rejection of the Lord’s real humanity” (ibid., 197–98).

Here are examples of what early Christian writers had to say on the subject of the the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist:

Ignatius of Antioch
“I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ . . . and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible” (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).

“Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).

Justin Martyr
“For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus
“If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?” (Against Heresies 4:33–32 [A.D. 189]).

“He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” (ibid., 5:2).

Tertullian
“There is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed [in baptism], in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God” (The Resurrection of the Dead 8 [A.D. 210]).

Hippolytus
“‘And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table’ [Prov. 9:2] . . . refers to his [Christ’s] honored and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper [i.e., the Last Supper]” (Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs [A.D. 217]).

Origen
“Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’ [John 6:55]” (Homilies on Numbers 7:2 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage
“He [Paul] threatens, moreover, the stubborn and forward, and denounces them, saying, ‘Whosoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord’ [1 Cor. 11:27]. All these warnings being scorned and contemned—[lapsed Christians will often take Communion] before their sin is expiated, before confession has been made of their crime, before their conscience has been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest, before the offense of an angry and threatening Lord has been appeased, [and so] violence is done to his body and blood; and they sin now against their Lord more with their hand and mouth than when they denied their Lord” (The Lapsed 15–16 [A.D. 251]).

Aphraahat the Persian Sage
“After having spoken thus [at the Last Supper], the Lord rose up from the place where he had made the Passover and had given his body as food and his blood as drink, and he went with his disciples to the place where he was to be arrested. But he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood, while he was pondering on the dead. With his own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten, and before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink” (Treatises 12:6 [A.D. 340]).

 

[Behold]

“Take and eat; this is my body.” He never said, "...this is a symbol of my body."

The OT Law, does not permit the drinking of blood or eating = other human beings.

Jesus was under the dominion of the OT LAW when He was at the Last Supper.

He had to keep the Law......

So, to literally drink the blood of Jesus or of Biden, or of anyone, is a bible stated "abomination"

If Jesus was literally wanting those in the upper room to eat His flesh and drink His blood, then He would have taken a knife, and cut some flesh off His arm, and passed it around, after He ate some of Himself first.
He would have then BLED into the CUP, and drank His own blood, and then passed this cup of blood around.

Didnt happen.

So, this pagan occult "cult of mary" idea of literally eating a human, and drinking their blood, .. or this science fiction "Cult of Mary" nonsense, that is taught as Black Baal Robed Catholic Priest having magic powers, over wine, cookies, and water baptism.... is just such a false fake Satanic deception.

Don't fall for it reader.
Its all a LIE.

 

[Augustin56]

The OT Law, does not permit the drinking of blood or eating = other human beings.

Jesus was under the dominion of the OT LAW when He was at the Last Supper.

He had to keep the Law......

So, to literally drink the blood of Jesus or of Biden, or of anyone, is a bible stated "abomination"

If Jesus was literally wanting those in the upper room to eat His flesh and drink His blood, then He would have taken a knife, and cut some flesh off His arm, and passed it around, after He ate some of Himself first.
He would have then BLED into the CUP, and drank His own blood, and then passed this cup of blood around.

Didnt happen.

So, this pagan occult "cult of mary" idea of literally eating a human, and drinking their blood, .. or this science fiction "Cult of Mary" nonsense, that is taught as Black Baal Robed Catholic Priest having magic powers, over wine, cookies, and water baptism.... is just such a false fake Satanic deception.

Don't fall for it reader.
Its all a LIE.

Jesus broke the Jewish law all the time, healing on Sabbath, etc. Jesus came to fulfill the law and start a new, final covenant with mankind. God established six covenants with man, ending with the one started by Jesus. Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament and began the New.

You cannot project what YOU would have done in Jesus' place because you aren't Jesus. You can chose to disagree with Jesus, but that has consequences that I'm pretty sure you don't want.

Jesus is God. God has authority over all creation and all humanity. He has, for example, the authority to forgive sins. Authority can be delegated, however. In the case of forgiving sins, Jesus delegated His Godly authority to forgive sins to the Apostles (and, by extension, their successors), in John 20:19-23.

On the evening of that first day of the week, when the doors were locked, where the disciples* were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, “Peace be with you.”
When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. The disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord.
Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.”
And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit.
Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.”

Focus now on the bold printed items. "As the Father has sent Me, so I send you." Well, how did the Father send Jesus? With all heavenly authority, including the authority to forgive sins!

"...he breated on them." Only two times in all Scripture does God "breathe" on man. Once in Genesis when He breathed life into Adam, and once here, where He imparted His Godly authority to the Apostles!

And to make it crystal clear, He spells it out! "Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them. And whose sins you retain are retained!

You shouldn't be so proud as to think Jesus should do things your way. He knows far better than any human.

 

[Robert Pate]

Again, you are giving your personal interpretation, filtered through modern world lenses. The Early Church Christians, the first Christians, believed that the Eucharist was really the Body and Blood of Our Savior.

Even Protestant historians show that. The doctrine of the Real Presence asserts that in the Holy Eucharist Jesus is literally and wholly present—body and blood, soul and divinity—under the appearances of bread and wine. Many Protestants attack this doctrine as “unbiblical,” but the Bible is forthright in declaring it (cf. 1 Cor. 10:16–17, 11:23–29; and, most forcefully, John 6:32–71).

The Early Church Fathers interpreted these passages literally. In summarizing the early Fathers’ teachings on Christ’s Real Presence, renowned Protestant historian of the early Church J. N. D. Kelly, writes: “Eucharistic teaching, it should be understood at the outset, was in general unquestioningly realist, i.e., the consecrated bread and wine were taken to be, and were treated and designated as, the Savior’s body and blood” (Early Christian Doctrines, 440).

From the Church’s early days, the Fathers referred to Christ’s presence in the Eucharist. Kelly writes: “Ignatius roundly declares that . . .the bread is the flesh of Jesus, the cup his blood. Clearly he intends this realism to be taken strictly, for he makes it the basis of his argument against the Docetists’ denial of the reality of Christ’s body. . . . Irenaeus teaches that the bread and wine are really the Lord’s body and blood. His witness is, indeed, all the more impressive because he produces it quite incidentally while refuting the Gnostic and Docetic rejection of the Lord’s real humanity” (ibid., 197–98).

Here are examples of what early Christian writers had to say on the subject of the the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist:

Ignatius of Antioch
“I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ . . . and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible” (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).

“Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).

Justin Martyr
“For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus
“If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?” (Against Heresies 4:33–32 [A.D. 189]).

“He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” (ibid., 5:2).

Tertullian
“There is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed [in baptism], in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God” (The Resurrection of the Dead 8 [A.D. 210]).

Hippolytus
“‘And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table’ [Prov. 9:2] . . . refers to his [Christ’s] honored and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper [i.e., the Last Supper]” (Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs [A.D. 217]).

Origen
“Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’ [John 6:55]” (Homilies on Numbers 7:2 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage
“He [Paul] threatens, moreover, the stubborn and forward, and denounces them, saying, ‘Whosoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord’ [1 Cor. 11:27]. All these warnings being scorned and contemned—[lapsed Christians will often take Communion] before their sin is expiated, before confession has been made of their crime, before their conscience has been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest, before the offense of an angry and threatening Lord has been appeased, [and so] violence is done to his body and blood; and they sin now against their Lord more with their hand and mouth than when they denied their Lord” (The Lapsed 15–16 [A.D. 251]).

Aphraahat the Persian Sage
“After having spoken thus [at the Last Supper], the Lord rose up from the place where he had made the Passover and had given his body as food and his blood as drink, and he went with his disciples to the place where he was to be arrested. But he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood, while he was pondering on the dead. With his own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten, and before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink” (Treatises 12:6 [A.D. 340]).

The real issue is about the law. Any religious thing that we do is a work of the law. The Eucharist is a work of the law. Paul said, "By the deeds of the law (what we do) no flesh will be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20. This means that there is nothing that we can do to merit salvation. Not by eating wafers and drinking grape. Not by doing a bunch of Catholic rituals. Not by baptism. Salvation has always been by grace through faith, Ephesians 2:8.

Catholicism is a law-based religion. Paul said, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for those that believe" Romans 10:4. Catholics don't believe the Gospel. They believe that you must do the law to be saved. If you don't follow Catholic doctrine and do the Catholic religion, you will be anathema (Kicked out of the Catholic church) To be kicked out of the Catholic church is to be sentenced to hell. Catholicism consist of a bunch of things to do. Jesus has already done all that needs to be done for our salvation. "We are complete in him" Colossians 2:10.

 

[Augustin56]

The real issue is about the law. Any religious thing that we do is a work of the law. The Eucharist is a work of the law. Paul said, "By the deeds of the law (what we do) no flesh will be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20. This means that there is nothing that we can do to merit salvation. Not by eating wafers and drinking grape. Not by doing a bunch of Catholic rituals. Not by baptism. Salvation has always been by grace through faith, Ephesians 2:8.

Catholicism is a law-based religion. Paul said, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for those that believe" Romans 10:4. Catholics don't believe the Gospel. They believe that you must do the law to be saved. If you don't follow Catholic doctrine and do the Catholic religion, you will be anathema (Kicked out of the Catholic church) To be kicked out of the Catholic church is to be sentenced to hell. Catholicism consist of a bunch of things to do. Jesus has already done all that needs to be done for our salvation. "We are complete in him" Colossians 2:10.

Robert, all you've done is give me your personal viewpoint, your personal interpretation.

When Saul (St. Paul by his Hebrew name) was going around persecuting the first Christians, Jesus knocked him off his horse and said to him (Acts 9:4), He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” Note that Jesus didn't say, "..why are you persecuting My Church?" which he was doing, but "...why do you persecute Me?" Christ identifies as one with His Church. Persecute Christ's Church and you are effectively persecuting Christ. The Catholic Church was the only Church for the first 1000 years of Christianity. The Orthodox splintered off in 1054 A.D., but kept Apostolic Succession and, therefore, all seven Sacraments. Protestantism didn't begin until the 16th century, way late in the game! And the only uniting factor in the continually splintering group of Protestant denominations is anti-Catholicism. That should give you pause.

There are two sets of laws in Scripture. Jewish law and Divine law (10 Commandments, for example). We are no longer bound by Jewish law, but are by Divine law. Christ gave His Church His Divine authority to govern and sanctify here on earth. He never gave anyone permission to start a church separate from the one He founded.

 

[Behold]

Jesus broke the Jewish law all the time, healing on Sabbath, etc.

So, you are accusing Jesus of eating human flesh, and drinking human blood?

And that is because you are taught that = """"Do THIS">.. .In REMEMBRANCE.... of Me"""... does not mean its symbolic.

So, the cult of mary has taught you that "REMEMBRANCE" is not "symbolic".

But it's obviously symbolic.

So.....You can realize that now that we are in the New Covenant.... that if you are literally drinking blood and eating human flesh, based on a magic spell put on the wafer and the wine by "Priests"......... you are in an Occult - Pagan worship situation. (nicely dressed up).

Its really that simple.

So, you can try to bend the bible, and say..."yeah, Jesus was always messing with that Law".. but, NOW< we are in the NT..New Covenant.... and you are still trying to drink blood and eat human flesh. = Literally.

You probably need to reflect more on that one, before you post more Church Fathers, as your "go to", proof text, as they prove very little, most of the time, except to prove what they don't understand ....when it comes to "Faith", "justification by Faith alone", or what it means to be born again.

 

[Robert Pate]

Robert, all you've done is give me your personal viewpoint, your personal interpretation.

When Saul (St. Paul by his Hebrew name) was going around persecuting the first Christians, Jesus knocked him off his horse and said to him (Acts 9:4), He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” Note that Jesus didn't say, "..why are you persecuting My Church?" which he was doing, but "...why do you persecute Me?" Christ identifies as one with His Church. Persecute Christ's Church and you are effectively persecuting Christ. The Catholic Church was the only Church for the first 1000 years of Christianity. The Orthodox splintered off in 1054 A.D., but kept Apostolic Succession and, therefore, all seven Sacraments. Protestantism didn't begin until the 16th century, way late in the game! And the only uniting factor in the continually splintering group of Protestant denominations is anti-Catholicism. That should give you pause.

There are two sets of laws in Scripture. Jewish law and Divine law (10 Commandments, for example). We are no longer bound by Jewish law, but are by Divine law. Christ gave His Church His Divine authority to govern and sanctify here on earth. He never gave anyone permission to start a church separate from the one He founded.

There is nothing in the Bible about a Catholic church. The church that evolved out of the Roman empire is not the same church that was in Jerusalem. There is no mention of a church in Rome. Why is that? The doctrine that Paul taught is anti-religion. It is not compatible with Catholicism. Why is that so? Paul said, "By the deeds of the law (what you do) no flesh will be justified" Romans 3:20. You don't believe Paul. Paul said, "You are complete in Christ" Colossians 2:10. Nothing about a church.

 

[Behold]

There is no mention of a church in Rome. Why is that? The doctrine that Paul taught is anti-religion.

Yes.

Denominations are man made.

God makes CHRISTians, not denominations.

As a matter of fact, there are no Denominations in Heaven.

Noone who will be in Heaven, is going to be asking others there...>>"what denomination were you before you came up here".

So, with that understanding, we find a good local church, and we invest there.. sure.
Sometimes that is difficult, as in these end times, its not such a simple thing to find a Bible believing church, that is built on NT Doctrines... that matter the most.

LIke : Justification by Faith, alone.

Reader, God built the Church on the Cross of Christ, and if a local church has not that as their foundation, then they are to be dismissed, omitted, avoided.

 

[amigo de christo]

Many Catholics, as well as other denominations, will be saved. Quit condemning everyone.

according to over seventy percent of christendom it now believes all religions be saved , just find common ground
, shut up about JESUS CHRIST and sound doctrine , and let all muslims buddists , atheists and all believe as they will .
Just let all be one . EXCUSE ME for not BUYING INTO THAT FALSE all inclusive lie . sorry that more and more are now doing so .
But why do YOU THINK GOD first said NOT to be unequally yoked , cause it will cause them to fall away .

 

[Robert Pate]

according to over seventy percent of christendom it now believes all religions be saved , just find common ground
, shut up about JESUS CHRIST and sound doctrine , and let all muslims buddists , atheists and all believe as they will .
Just let all be one . EXCUSE ME for not BUYING INTO THAT FALSE all inclusive lie . sorry that more and more are now doing so .
But why do YOU THINK GOD first said NOT to be unequally yoked , cause it will cause them to fall away .

Right. Here is my definition of religion.

RELIGION: Man's preoccupation with his own spirituality, which is himself, who is a sinner.

Religion is man's attempt to justify and reconcile himself to God by the works of the law (what he does). Paul said, "By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20.

 

[amigo de christo]

Right. Here is my definition of religion.

RELIGION: Man's preoccupation with his own spirituality, which is himself, who is a sinner.

Religion is man's attempt to justify and reconcile himself to God by the works of the law (what he does). Paul said, "By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20.

Yet this is exactly what the all inclusive broad road love path teaches . IT TEACHES and gives the idea
that anyone is saved , anyone knows GOD if they just have this love stuff . IN OTHER WORDS , ITS LEGALISM under guise that it is love .
OOPS . IT CANT SAVE THEM EITHER . SEEING IT DENIES JESUS as having to be believed upon as the CHRIST . oops THAT IS ANTI CHRIST love right there . ANTI CHRIST VERSION of love has many now bought into .
And ps , any love that honors sins , YEAH IT AINT COMING FROM GOD . TRUE CHARITY REJOICES IN TRUTH , NOT INQUITY .
SO out with the love of money and out with the dark rainbows too . Cause none of that cometh of GOD or will ever HONOR GOD or CHRIST .

 

[Robert Pate]

Robert, all you've done is give me your personal viewpoint, your personal interpretation.

When Saul (St. Paul by his Hebrew name) was going around persecuting the first Christians, Jesus knocked him off his horse and said to him (Acts 9:4), He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” Note that Jesus didn't say, "..why are you persecuting My Church?" which he was doing, but "...why do you persecute Me?" Christ identifies as one with His Church. Persecute Christ's Church and you are effectively persecuting Christ. The Catholic Church was the only Church for the first 1000 years of Christianity. The Orthodox splintered off in 1054 A.D., but kept Apostolic Succession and, therefore, all seven Sacraments. Protestantism didn't begin until the 16th century, way late in the game! And the only uniting factor in the continually splintering group of Protestant denominations is anti-Catholicism. That should give you pause.

There are two sets of laws in Scripture. Jewish law and Divine law (10 Commandments, for example). We are no longer bound by Jewish law, but are by Divine law. Christ gave His Church His Divine authority to govern and sanctify here on earth. He never gave anyone permission to start a church separate from the one He founded.

You don't use the Bible to make your point, instead you use the writings of the Catholic church. There is only one law it is the Mosiac law. Jesus taught the Mosiac law. The law does not save, nor does it justify. The purpose of the law is to judge and condemn. This is why Paul said, "By the law no flesh will be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20.

Paul also said, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for those that believe" Romans 10:4. You don't believe, instead you believe the Catholic church.

 

[RedFan]

The law does not save, nor does it justify. The purpose of the law is to judge and condemn. This is why Paul said, "By the law no flesh will be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20.

Paul also said, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for those that believe" Romans 10:4. You don't believe, instead you believe the Catholic church.

Robert, let me suggest a distinction to keep in mind: between the Law’s innate inability to save, and mankind’s innate inability to keep the Law sufficiently to be saved (a la Rom. 2:1 - 3:20). I read Gal. 3:12 and Rom. 10:5 to mean that salvation is available under the Law, provided one keeps it perfectly. And difficult though it is, it is not an impossible task. (Who would be so bold as to declare that Luke 1:6 is a lie? or that Paul himself lied in claiming to be blameless under the Law, Phil. 3:6?)

The issue is simple to frame: is salvation available under the Law? Galatians, no less than Romans, has become something of a proof text for millions of Christians to answer No. But a close reading of Galatians does not actually support that answer. Rather, it supports “Don’t choose to play by those Rules, you foolish Galatians; for once you sign up for that, you’ll almost certainly fail to end up with the required perfect score – and thanks to Calvary, there is now an easier way, so why take the chance?”

 

[Robert Pate]

Robert, let me suggest a distinction to keep in mind: between the Law’s innate inability to save, and mankind’s innate inability to keep the Law sufficiently to be saved (a la Rom. 2:1 - 3:20). I read Gal. 3:12 and Rom. 10:5 to mean that salvation is available under the Law, provided one keeps it perfectly. And difficult though it is, it is not an impossible task. (Who would be so bold as to declare that Luke 1:6 is a lie? or that Paul himself lied in claiming to be blameless under the Law, Phil. 3:6?)

The issue is simple to frame: is salvation available under the Law? Galatians, no less than Romans, has become something of a proof text for millions of Christians to answer No. But a close reading of Galatians does not actually support that answer. Rather, it supports “Don’t choose to play by those Rules, you foolish Galatians; for once you sign up for that, you’ll almost certainly fail to end up with the required perfect score – and thanks to Calvary, there is now an easier way, so why take the chance?”

There are two different kinds of righteousness. There is the righteousness of God and then there is the righteousness of man. Many possess the righteousness of man thinking that it is the righteousness of God. No one that is born after Adam possess the righteousness of God. To possess the righteousness of God you would have to be born after God. Jesus Christ is the only one that was born after God. All the rest have been born after Adam and are sinners. Adam was our first father, everyone born after Adam have inherited Adam's sinful nature. Romans 5:12.

 

[Philip James]

The Eucharist is a work of the law

wha??

There is only one law it is the Mosiac law.

Where will I find the Eucharist in the Mosaic law?

Merry Christmas!

 

[Robert Pate]

wha??



Where will I find the Eucharist in the Mosaic law?

Merry Christmas!

Anything in the Bible that tells us to do something or not to do something is Law. Paul said, "By the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20. To be under the law or subject to the law is to be under the curse, Galatians 3:10.

 

[Philip James]

Anything in the Bible that tells us to do something or not to do something is Law

There is only one law it is the Mosiac law.

You are contradicting yourself...

 

[Robert Pate]

You are contradicting yourself...

Try this one. "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to those that believe" Romans 10:4.

The words "Law" and "Religion" mean the same thing. When one is doing the law, they are doing their religion. When one is doing their religion, they are doing the law.

This means that all religions are worthless, because "Christ is the end of the law (religions) for those that believe" Romans 10:4.