Holy Meal Vs. Holy Meal

[Adrestia]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1511952' date='Apr 27 2008, 06:39 PM']Good idea.

I've got it under control though.[/quote]Exactly what have you got under control?

[Deb]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1511932' date='Apr 27 2008, 07:10 PM']Funny, I learned the word saint from a Pentecostal church that I use to belong too. Everybody considered everybody saints in that religion, because were all believed we were God's children.

Since Pentecostalism reps about 100 million people, I guess you are wrong.

Some things in different religions are right, and one of those right things is anybody who serves God is a saint. You don't have to perform notable miracles. Everybody who believes is a saint![/quote]

I am not surprised you couldn't respond. You pick out one little thing and ignored the entire remainder of the discussion. Toss out the definition of Saint. Now, respond to my last two posts. Address each item I discussed. That is what a debate is.

For example, in your brief comment above, you stated that Pentecostalism represents about 100 million people. WRONG. It is more like 2.5 million, WORLDWIDE. There are 177 separate denominations of Pentecostalism. Each one created by whomever decided they didn't like someone or some rule or some interpretation of the last group they were in. Pentecostalism has been around about 100 years and is really based, not on the bible or the word of God even.
So, which denomination did you get your info from? Was it the ones that refuse to baptize anyone in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? (ya know, like Christ demanded?) or the ones who do not believe you are really baptized unless you can speak in tongues? Talk about Satan wanting to divide people. He did alright.
Now, compare that to Catholicism, 1.2 billion (minimum) active and 2000 years of history based on the directions of Christ through the Holy Spirit? Hmmmm. I am just glad I am still with the church Satan is set on destroying and never will. Christ said his church would survive the gates of Hades. It has and it will.


Everybody who believes is a Saint? So anyone I would know who believes in Jesus Christ but, engages in fornication, homosexual activities in airport restrooms, adultery, lying etc is a Saint. That isn't even make sense much less something one could debate. All those pro-choice religious people out there who BELIEVE in JESUS are saints? I suppose you think that anyone who believes is also automatically saved and going to heaven. That is another funny one.

C'mon lightweight. Give me something interesting to debate or at least something with some degree of difficulty. Give me something sound and intelligient in response to my statements. You can't. You have nothing. Your bag is empty. Cry uncle now.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='tgoldson' post='1511960' date='Apr 27 2008, 07:01 PM']Exactly what have you got under control?[/quote]
Hopefully, someone to go through the Catchism with me.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='Deb' post='1512075' date='Apr 27 2008, 08:07 PM']I am not surprised you couldn't respond. You pick out one little thing and ignored the entire remainder of the discussion. Toss out the definition of Saint. Now, respond to my last two posts. Address each item I discussed. That is what a debate is.

For example, in your brief comment above, you stated that Pentecostalism represents about 100 million people. WRONG. It is more like 2.5 million, WORLDWIDE. There are 177 separate denominations of Pentecostalism. Each one created by whomever decided they didn't like someone or some rule or some interpretation of the last group they were in. Pentecostalism has been around about 100 years and is really based, not on the bible or the word of God even.
So, which denomination did you get your info from? Was it the ones that refuse to baptize anyone in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? (ya know, like Christ demanded?) or the ones who do not believe you are really baptized unless you can speak in tongues? Talk about Satan wanting to divide people. He did alright.
Now, compare that to Catholicism, 1.2 billion (minimum) active and 2000 years of history based on the directions of Christ through the Holy Spirit? Hmmmm. I am just glad I am still with the church Satan is set on destroying and never will. Christ said his church would survive the gates of Hades. It has and it will.
Everybody who believes is a Saint? So anyone I would know who believes in Jesus Christ but, engages in fornication, homosexual activities in airport restrooms, adultery, lying etc is a Saint. That isn't even make sense much less something one could debate. All those pro-choice religious people out there who BELIEVE in JESUS are saints? I suppose you think that anyone who believes is also automatically saved and going to heaven. That is another funny one.

C'mon lightweight. Give me something interesting to debate or at least something with some degree of difficulty. Give me something sound and intelligient in response to my statements. You can't. You have nothing. Your bag is empty. Cry uncle now.[/quote]

This thread is about Eucrist.

I will ask you to stay on topic, and not try a side diversion again.

[Deb]

Don't bother. I don't think you could understand it.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='Deb' post='1512082' date='Apr 27 2008, 08:10 PM']Don't bother. I don't think you could understand it.[/quote]

Wow, that sounds pretty arrogant. . .

Are you a Christian.

What's Jesus going to say about you?

When I said someone was going to help me with the teachings you hold dear, you insulted me.

You do know where that is from, right?

Deb, if I were you, I would be repenting right now for that evil remark, because that is not Christ like. You are pretty evil in my eyes, because of statements like that.

[Deb]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1512081' date='Apr 27 2008, 09:10 PM']This thread is about Eucrist.

I will ask you to stay on topic, and not try a side diversion again.[/quote]


I think I am truly in the twilight zone. Seems to me you diverted the original debate I put out on the Eucharist with your saint comment.
I am starting to feel like I am on an acid trip and someone is purposely messing with my head. That was never allowed back in the day.
I don't know whether to burst out laughing or just bang my head against the wall. or both.

[Deb]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1512087' date='Apr 27 2008, 09:14 PM']Wow, that sounds pretty arrogant. . .

Are you a Christian.

What's Jesus going to say about you?

When I said someone was going to help me with the teachings you hold dear, you insulted me.

You do know where that is from, right?

Deb, if I were you, I would be repenting right now for that evil remark, because that is not Christ like. You are pretty evil in my eyes, because of statements like that.[/quote]

Maybe, I am not really Deb. Maybe I am true, pure evil. Maybe, I can see you right now and know exactly where you are. Maybe I am going to respond with really bizarre things just to test you. Muuuaahahhahahhaahahhhhahahahhh

Talk about arrogant? Deb, repent. Deb you are evil. Deb, what would Jesus say? Eat the platitudes and debate the Eucharist. These side diversions are getting tedious and boring.

Well, not boring. Kind of funny actually.

Is anyone going to stop me before the thread gets shut down?

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='Deb' post='1512096' date='Apr 27 2008, 08:31 PM']Maybe, I am not really Deb. Maybe I am true, pure evil. Maybe, I can see you right now and know exactly where you are. Maybe I am going to respond with really bizarre things just to test you. Muuuaahahhahahhaahahhhhahahahhh

Talk about arrogant? Deb, repent. Deb you are evil. Deb, what would Jesus say? Eat the platitudes and debate the Eucharist. These side diversions are getting tedious and boring.

Well, not boring. Kind of funny actually.

Is anyone going to stop me before the thread gets shut down?[/quote]

I think you need to read the rules again.

Post like this again, and I will report you.

1. The Rule of Charity: “Charity is primary.”
This has to be the place to start whenever we disagree with one another: with love. St. Paul said: “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal” (1 Cor. 13:1). No matter how wise my insights or astute my plans, they count for nothing if I do not offer them with love.

Now, that charity is the first and fundamental requirement for all authentic Christian speech does not mean that such speaking can only be weak, but it does mean that whatever is said ought always to be offered respectfully and for the genuine service of others, especially my hearers. In fact, all of St. Paul’s sage advice in the “Hymn to Charity” in 1 Cor. 13 spells out eloquently this “Rule.”

[Laudate_Dominum]

Dang.. This thread is getting very heated and all that.

I hope this thread doesn't get closed for going off the deep end, it is otherwise a cool discussion.

[picchick]

Ok Deb....I love you and all but



EVERYBODY CHILL OUT!!!!!! I am being very serious. No more offensive flingsWe aren't out for blood here...just a good holy meal
No more "Lightweight" and no more judging (pretty evil in my eyes)
Ok....

Yes the pedophile priests did consecrate the bread and wine and it did turn into the Body and Blood of Christ. God cannot fault His people and deny them their spiritual food because the priest did something behind closed doors.

Really, what should have happened with those priests is that they should have been removed IMMEDIATELY but that is another topic.

I don't know where we are at with this conversation.

Dairygirl: When my faith is challenged...I take it very seriously. I am very sorry for what has happened in your past that made you leave the Church It saddens me to hear these stories. I love reading your threads though and they really do make me think

Edited April 28, 2008 by picchick

[Aloysius]

the priest can't consecrate because he is somehow holier than everyone else, he can consecrate because he was chosen as an Apostle of Jesus Christ like the original 12 (the rest of the believers are disciples not apostles)... and just like 1/12 of the original Apostles was a bad apple, so too might there be bad apples amongst the priests of today... but it is not through their own power that a priest consecrates but through Christ's power: the power he gave to the 12 Apostles and their successors (the bishops and by extension, the priests) so that they could take care of His disciples (ie us)

he didn't give his disciples that power; the Last Supper only speaks of the 12 Apostles being in attendance, those are the only ones He told to say "This is my body" and "This is the chalice of my blood" over bread and wine. only men who have a direct line from those whom the Apostles named as their successors to the present day are called by Jesus Christ to perform that act... and only Catholic and Eastern Orthodox priests can claim that they have that direct line.

[dairygirl4u2c]

JIMSH does like to sit in his ivory tower.... he acts as if everything he says is true, and will accept, in theory, if you force him, that something he says might not be true.


he is the one who diverted teh thread with the saint stuff. now that ti's off course but the distraction winding down... he should be getting back to topic, but he's not.

and then he gets upset when people act the same way he does. including what i just said, but mostly the idea of avoiding debate and casting out "evil" this and evil that etc.

just an observation.

Edited April 28, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

one thing that strikes me when reading the John 6 discourse.

is that the followers responded to "the bread i will give is my flesh for the life of the world". with"how can this man give us his flesh to eat?".
and up to that poit, he hadn't said anything about flesh. he'd only been talking about bread and metaphors. and only in repsonse to that did Jesus say his eat my flesh discourse.

at the point htey asked if he was giving flesh to eat... it could have been talking about atonement... flesh on the cross etc. and jesus was simly running with the idea.

and to throw another possible wrench into that, he said "the words i have spoken are spirit and life" after all that. which would also indicate figurative.

the disciples did leave though. and didn't come back.
but recently i realized many didn't know what he meant when he said that he'd build the tmeple up in hree days, referring to himself. and he didn't correct them, and in fact, people were talking about that at the crucifixtion too in the bible. this might not be super analogous but it's something to consider.

but one other point... which i never really looked up or looked into... is the idea that he changed verb tenses from ordiary "eat" to "gnaw" which catholics say was enforcing a hard idea. a word which means "unless you mutiliate my body, you hve no life in you". though, i think that could be applied to atonement... and how his death was a necessity. and, i have not looked into how htey get that the change in verbs indicates necessarily a more froceful saying... it might be an exaggeration until actual orginaial language looked at.

[picchick]

A priest once said that many times Jesus had to explain his parables when asked to clarify. This is one of the only cases where Jesus does not use symbolism because when He said

Now I have the Douay-Rheims version so bear with me:

[quote]Amen, amen I say unto you: He that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die. 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, for the life of the world.

The Jews therefore strove among themselves saying: How can this man give us His flesh to eat?

Then Jesus said to them: Amen amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His Blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my Blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I him him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eatheth me, the same also shall live by me.

This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that easteth this bread, shall live for ever.

These things he said, teaching in the synagugue, in Capharnaum.

Maybe therefore of his disciples, hearing it said: This saying is hard and who can hear it?

But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this said to them: Doth this scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.[/quote]

Ok, excuse the typos. There are so many important things here.

Jesus does mention flesh before the Jews do: [quote]the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.[/quote]

Then the Jews question this. Jesus explains further repeating himself many times. He says: [quote]For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.[/quote] That is pretty explicit. I don't know how you can argue symbolism there.

Then the disciples reject this teaching and begin to leave. What does Jesus do? He doesn't say, "Wait, wait wait! You mistook me! I really didn't mean EAT my body! I mean it in a metaphorical way!"

No, he says: Is this to hard for you to get? Why does this offend you? My words are spirit and life. By spirit and life, I don't think He means that His words are symbols but rather that these words will help in you spirit and life.

Meg

[Deb]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1512430' date='Apr 28 2008, 10:15 AM']one thing that strikes me when reading the John 6 discourse.

is that the followers responded to "the bread i will give is my flesh for the life of the world". with"how can this man give us his flesh to eat?".
and up to that poit, he hadn't said anything about flesh. he'd only been talking about bread and metaphors. and only in repsonse to that did Jesus say his eat my flesh discourse.

at the point htey asked if he was giving flesh to eat... it could have been talking about atonement... flesh on the cross etc. and jesus was simly running with the idea.

and to throw another possible wrench into that, he said "the words i have spoken are spirit and life" after all that. which would also indicate figurative.

the disciples did leave though. and didn't come back.
but recently i realized many didn't know what he meant when he said that he'd build the tmeple up in hree days, referring to himself. and he didn't correct them, and in fact, people were talking about that at the crucifixtion too in the bible. this might not be super analogous but it's something to consider.

but one other point... which i never really looked up or looked into... is the idea that he changed verb tenses from ordiary "eat" to "gnaw" which catholics say was enforcing a hard idea. a word which means "unless you mutiliate my body, you hve no life in you". though, i think that could be applied to atonement... and how his death was a necessity. and, i have not looked into how htey get that the change in verbs indicates necessarily a more froceful saying... it might be an exaggeration until actual orginaial language looked at.[/quote]

In John's gospel he is very clear as to when Jesus is using a parable or discussing something that others just don't understand. The verb used then in classical Greek for eats, would have meant munch or gnaw and refers literally to eating his flesh. John's chapter on eating the flesh and drinking the blood is very literal and it is emphasized. Jesus repeats himself many times to make it clear. I think his statement that the words he has spoken are spirit and life are literal too. They will not understand that his words of eating his flesh are literally giving one everlasting life when they eat it until they have received the spirit. No one can get to Jesus unless through the spirit as no one can get to God except through Jesus.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='picchick' post='1512443' date='Apr 28 2008, 09:35 AM']A priest once said that many times Jesus had to explain his parables when asked to clarify. This is one of the only cases where Jesus does not use symbolism because when He said

Now I have the Douay-Rheims version so bear with me:
Ok, excuse the typos. There are so many important things here.

Jesus does mention flesh before the Jews do:

Then the Jews question this. Jesus explains further repeating himself many times. He says: That is pretty explicit. I don't know how you can argue symbolism there.

Then the disciples reject this teaching and begin to leave. What does Jesus do? He doesn't say, "Wait, wait wait! You mistook me! I really didn't mean EAT my body! I mean it in a metaphorical way!"

No, he says: Is this to hard for you to get? Why does this offend you? My words are spirit and life. By spirit and life, I don't think He means that His words are symbols but rather that these words will help in you spirit and life.

Meg[/quote]

hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate) to nick pick scripture with you Meg, but did you read the last paragraphy closely?

But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this said to them: Doth this scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? [b]It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing.[/b] The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

It is the spirit that saves us, not the flesh. The words he speaks are spiritual, and not flesh. . .

As a side note, Jesus says he was ascending to where we was before, proving that Christ is indeed God, and therefore we have someone saying he was god in a round about way.

Edited April 28, 2008 by JesusIsMySuperHero

[dairygirl4u2c]

how do you account for the fact they left JIMSH apparently/arguably wrongfully guided and Jesus let them under false pretenses? i have a few ideas but want to hear yours.

how do you respond to the verb tense changes?

how do you respond to the idea that the early church was so forceful in the literal understanding?
i checked once, and tehre's strong langauge in all the known area that time.... asia minor, europe/italy, northern africa... all in the earliest church.

Edited April 28, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[picchick]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1512459' date='Apr 28 2008, 10:48 AM']hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate), appreciate) to nick pick scripture with you Meg, but did you read the last paragraphy closely?

But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this said to them: Doth this scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? [b]It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing.[/b] The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

It is the spirit that saves us, not the flesh. The words he speaks are spiritual, and not flesh. . .

As a side note, Jesus says he was ascending to where we was before, proving that Christ is indeed God, and therefore we have someone saying he was god in a round about way.[/quote]

No please get nick picky...it is the only way I learn.

Could it not mean that Jesus flesh that we eat is not for our flesh but for our spirits? Our flesh profiteth nothing but our spirits quickeneth.

I don't understand what you mean when you say: As a side note, Jesus says he was ascending to where we was before, proving that Christ is indeed God, and therefore we have someone saying he was god in a round about way.

[CatherineM]

I think the part I like best about Jesus' discourse on the Body in John is that he just hammers it over and over again, and then basically stands back and says take it or leave it. I think the church still operates with that same authority. This is who we are, this is what we believe, take it or leave it.