Who founded your church?

[BreadOfLife]

Can you show me where he cut off fingers to feed us? You know that Passover was a symbolic feast, correct? His modification of the Passover is also symbolic.

The first and best known of these symbols is called the afikomen... afikomen is actually a Greek word meaning the coming one" (habba' in Hebrew) and is a clear reference to the Messiah.1. The afikomen is a piece of matzah, (unleavened bread) that is broken before the Passover meal.

Jesus was confirming he was the messiah the bread represents so the bread represents him.

His fingers??
Now there's a Scripturally-bankrupt comment.

EVERYTHING in the OT points to Christ - and where there is an OT TYPE - there is an NT FULFILLMENT.
Just as the Passover Lamb was to be consumed - so it is for the Lamb of God. Jesus gave us His body and blood to consume and gave us the SACRAMENTAL way in which to do it. The bread and wine are transformed into His flesh and blood.

there is absolutely NOTHING in the words of Jesus that render this to be merely "symbolic".
I hereby challenge yto produce the verses that make ths arbument.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Okay, you admit your adult daughter is your child.
With that settled, Acts 2: 28-39 is a promise unto your adult child.
You better tell her if you really love her.

Show me where Acts 2:39 says ANYTHING about having to be amn adult, Einstein.

I'll waih right here for your response . . .

 

[marksman]

Please give me a definition of each

Definition of each what?

 

[marksman]

Can you show me where he cut off fingers to feed us? You know that Passover was a symbolic feast, correct? His modification of the Passover is also symbolic.

The first and best known of these symbols is called the afikomen... afikomen is actually a Greek word meaning the coming one" (habba' in Hebrew) and is a clear reference to the Messiah.1. The afikomen is a piece of matzah, (unleavened bread) that is broken before the Passover meal.

Jesus was confirming he was the messiah the bread represents so the bread represents him.

WRONG. it is all about context.
The situation was the passover meal. Eaten once a year.
It was a meal not a sip of wine and piece of bread.
A paasover meal was started by the head of the house breaking up the unleavened bread and giving to all those present before they started eating their MEAL. That is why people in the Middle East invite others to break bread with them.
That was standard practice for any meal.
The passover was once a year, not every week.
Those celebrating were Jews. They would have no concept of communion as we know it.
At the passover meal it was standard practice to have four glasses of wine for various aspects of it.
As for the catholic idea that the wine is the blood of Jesus literally, is rubbish. I asked a catholic what wine turned into blood tasted like and he said wine. I can assure you blood does not taste like wine.
There is nothing in the Word of God that suggests they celebrated the passover every week and certainly not every day as catholics do.
And the whole point of the 1 Corinthians passage is to stop people who came to the communal meal eating until all of the people had arrived and each could share the food together. It talks about being hungry and I can assure you that a sip of wine and piece of bread isn't going to do much for those that are hungry.
As for christians not drinking wine, how did they get drunk?
So I would like to suggest that we stop taking a text out of context as it is a pretext.

 

[Illuminator]

Again, according to the Catholic Church. Doesn’t hold any revelance to non-Catholics.

Again, you give no definitions. You don't define "non-Catholics" either, and I am not talking about them, I am talking about 3 kinds of Christians. "Non-Catholics" would include atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. Your complaint that the definitions I gave are Catholic definitions is stupid. Complaining with no substance and no definitions.

 

[Illuminator]

That man is highly dangerous . He preaches another jesus . one that allows muslims and any other religoin to follow its own religoin .
Scary times we live in . Everyone , take a peek at that face . THEN ensure your church nor anyone wants unity with that . Very dangerous that man is . very dangerous .

Did you learn these lies from laughsense.com that you accept as literal truth???

very dangerous

 

[Renniks]

there is absolutely NOTHING in the words of Jesus that render this to be merely "symbolic".

The disciples didn't drink literal blood and neither do we. They didn't eat literal flesh and would have been horrified at the thought. Christ may be present in the elements without the elements being anything other than what they are.
Jesus' words should be seen in the context of many parables and figurative references. For example, Jesus says, "I am the Vine" (John 15:1), the Door (John 10:9), the Bread (John 6:41). Jesus' main method of teaching was through parables; for Jesus, parables were not the exception but the rule, though when necessary he explained the parables to his disciples (Mark 4:34).
Jesus held the bread in his hand when he said "This is my body," at the same time that the disciples could see his physical body. There was a clear distinction between the two. The context therefore requires a figurative interpretation.
The phrase "this cup is a new covenant" (Luke 22:20) surely doesn't mean that the physical cup is the new covenant. That phrase is clearly symbolic and figurative. So are the words about the bread being Jesus' body.
John 6:27-59 uses bold terms to explain a spiritual feeding on Christ. This passage concludes, "The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life" (John 6:63), suggesting a figurative feeding rather than a literal, bodily feeding.
The Real Presence (rather than a spiritual presence) in the elements isn't taught in the early church for at least 75 years and perhaps twice that. If the Real Presence and transubstantiation were the church's primitive understanding, you'd expect much earlier a clear exposition of this doctrine. Even after an understanding of the Real Presence was common, many Church Fathers recognized a spiritual interpretation of the Words of Institution.

 

[Renniks]

WRONG. it is all about context.
The situation was the passover meal. Eaten once a year.
It was a meal not a sip of wine and piece of bread.
A paasover meal was started by the head of the house breaking up the unleavened bread and giving to all those present before they started eating their MEAL. That is why people in the Middle East invite others to break bread with them.
That was standard practice for any meal.
The passover was once a year, not every week.
Those celebrating were Jews. They would have no concept of communion as we know it.
At the passover meal it was standard practice to have four glasses of wine for various aspects of it.
As for the catholic idea that the wine is the blood of Jesus literally, is rubbish. I asked a catholic what wine turned into blood tasted like and he said wine. I can assure you blood does not taste like wine.
There is nothing in the Word of God that suggests they celebrated the passover every week and certainly not every day as catholics do.
And the whole point of the 1 Corinthians passage is to stop people who came to the communal meal eating until all of the people had arrived and each could share the food together. It talks about being hungry and I can assure you that a sip of wine and piece of bread isn't going to do much for those that are hungry.
As for christians not drinking wine, how did they get drunk?
So I would like to suggest that we stop taking a text out of context as it is a pretext.

Where did I say it was every week? I know what the Seder was. I've taken it. Yes, we in our Western world shorten it to a fifteen-minute communion instead of a real feast. This doesn't mean it loses its significance, IMO.

 

[theefaith]

Right! A sign doesn't save, it points to salvation. Just as the bread isn't Christ in the Eucharist, but points to Christ as a symbol.

no it signifies the action to f grace it is one integral unit, the water, the words, and grace

no Jesus said “this IS my body!

 

[theefaith]

Definition of each what?

I’ll do it for you

Redemption, Justification, Sanctification, and Salvation!

Redemption: 100 percent the work of God, thru the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ! All mankind are redeemed in Christ! Eph 2
Galatians 2:16 3:13
Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law...

Justification: our acceptance of redemption thru faith and baptism! Become a disciple and member of Christ and His Church! Jn 3:5 acts 2:38 Mk 16:16 He who believes and is baptized shall be saved. 1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. Galatians 3:27
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.


Sanctification: the life of grace in the holy sacrifice of the mass and sacraments, prayer, virture, and good works, the just living by faith, and faith working thru love! Phil 1:29 called to suffer with Christ.
All done in Christ thru His grace! Jn 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

Salvation: a christian in the state if grace at the moment of death we enter into the salvation of the Lord! Mt 24:44-47 faithful servant! Jn 15:1-5 abide in me. Mt 24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
Heb 4:14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
Rom 13:11 ...for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.
Then Once saved always saved!

 

[Truther]

At the Methodist Church they use real bread. But I don't see why the kind of bread matters. Or the kind of wine and such. It's symbolism after all.

It matters.

The original "communion" was a feast celebration of the death of Jesus. The wafer, or tidbit is just another RCC doctrine that took over Christianity.

 

[Truther]

I can stomach the wafers , its much of their doctrine i cannot swallow . Dangerous times we live in . Mama rome
has made a very broad road . very broad . As for me , JESUS ONLYS SAVES . Ye must believe From the heart
that God has raised him from the dead and confess Him by the mouth to be saved .
But that aint what pope francis had to say . He is highly dangerous . OH i wish not his death , but He is dangerously deceptive .
And the lambs gotta hold onto the one true gospel and firm to the end . Budda dont save , muslim god dont either .
ONLY JESUS .

All you have to do to officially break free from the RCC is obey Acts 2:38. After you obey it, you can fine tune the rest.

 

[Truther]

My first confession was at about 8 years old.
I was born again at about 30 days old when I was Baptized.

You repented at 30 days old?

You must have been a bad baby.

I feel sorry for your folks.

 

[Truther]

Another idiotic question because you refuse to admit that you're wrong.
I already obliterated your weak literalist argument by showing you the scholarly linguistic evidence about what "In the name of" actually means.

Go back and study posts 2572 and 2631.

Let the forum see that the Catholic is afraid to tell us what the name of the son is.

 

[theefaith]

You repented at 30 days old?

You must have been a bad baby.

I feel sorry for your folks.

 

[Truther]

Show me where Acts 2:39 says ANYTHING about having to be amn adult, Einstein.

I'll waih right here for your response . . .

So now you must tell your adult daughter she is not your child anymore.

Bad dad!

 

[theefaith]

It matters.

The original "communion" was a feast celebration of the death of Jesus. The wafer, or tidbit is just another RCC doctrine that took over Christianity.

Originally it was the sacrifice of the Passover with unleavened bread and four cups of wine and hymns

 

[theefaith]

It matters.

The original "communion" was a feast celebration of the death of Jesus. The wafer, or tidbit is just another RCC doctrine that took over Christianity.

Offering of the liturgy!
The holy sacrifice of Jesus Christ!
Luke 22:19 “do this in memory of me”!


The Passover
(The new covenant Passover sacrifice of Christ)


The cup refers to the Passover
The sacrifice prefigured the sacrifice of Christ
Christ was celebrating the Passover and changing it into the new covenant Passover in his own body and blood
Began in the last supper with the psalm then to the garden and ended with his death in the cross with the words commanded to be said at the consummation of the Passover sacrifice by the high priest “IT IS FINISHED”!!!

jn 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

1 cor 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

1 cor 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

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.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
Notice the connection to his betrayal and death

1 cor 5:6-8
For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast

but something is missing we have to eat the lamb

jn 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

 

[theefaith]

Let the forum see that the Catholic is afraid to tell us what the name of the son is.

Jesus Christ!

now obey Him and be baptized in the name of the father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit

 

[theefaith]

So now you must tell your adult daughter she is not your child anymore.

Bad dad!

Matthew 19:14
But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.