Catholic Church The First (Jesus Christ, Earth, Messiah, Kingdom, tradition)

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by TruthInCatholocism

For the first 800 years of Christianity, there was no doubt regarding the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

I disagree. According to noted scholar of early Christianity, John G. Davies, "The Hebrew, unlike the Greek, was not interested in things in themselves but only in things as they are called to be. He was not concerned with an object as such but with what it becomes in relation to its final reference according to the divine purpose. The meaning of an object therefore does not lie in its analytical and empirical reality but in the will that is expressed by it. Hence Jesus could say of a piece of bread: 'This is my body.' The bread does not cease to be bread, but it becomes what it is not, namely the instrument and organ of his presence, because through his sovereign word he has given it a new dimension."

It was actually among the Gnostics that the doctrine of Real Presence or Transubstantiation was first promoted. True, it was early in Christian history, but this doctrine was absolutely not taught by Christ's Apostles.

Infant Baptism: Where infants Baptized? Entire Housholds were batptized by the 12 Apostles (ENTIRE)

If "entire households" were baptized, and we are to assume that means little babies, I suppose that we can also assume that when Paul says that "all have sinned," he must also be referring to Mary, Christ's mother.

Ever Look into church history? Nah no Non-Catolic would want to....

You're kidding, right?

I can keep going.......

What church... What Church other then the Catholic Church follows these teachigns today?

Depends upon who you ask.

[athanasius]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

I disagree.
It was actually among the Gnostics that the doctrine of Real Presence or Transubstantiation was first promoted. True, it was early in Christian history, but this doctrine was absolutely not taught by Christ's Apostles.

Depends upon who you ask. [/font][/font]

Actually, Kats you are incorrect. The earliest proponent of the beleif in transubstantiation(The Eucharist is really Christ flesh and blood) outside of the bible would come from a Catholic Bishop named St Ignatius of Antioch who lived in the first century, wrote in the early second century, and was a hand picked Orthodox(Not gnostic at all) Bishop taught by the apostle John himself.

Here is what he had to say about the eucharist in the year 107 ad

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]).

So here St Ignatius (taught by the apostle John), actually tells us that only Heretics do not believe that the Holy eucharist IS the real flesh and blood of God. And they perish in thier disputes.

You are hard pressed to find any of the fathers of the Church for the first 8 centuries ever doubitng the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. They believe thew same as we Catholics do. They same as Jesus taught. They show us how the scriptures were always taught by the Apostles and lived out and what thier interpeatation of "This is My Body" meant. I just wrote a Paper on this for College.

If you would like a list of alot more fathers that show this Catholic teaching consistently in apostolic age check here:

http://www.catholic.com/library/Real_Presence.asp

By the way Ignatius wa also the first in history to call the church "Catholic". And remeber he was solid(Not heretic) Christian bishop who was taught by the apostles John himself. So was the early church Catholic by apostolic teaching? Yes! Did she teach the real presence of Christ in the eucharist Yes!

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by athanasius

Actually, Kats you are incorrect. The earliest proponent of the beleif in transubstantiation(The Eucharist is really Christ flesh and blood) outside of the bible would come from a Catholic Bishop named St Ignatius of Antioch who lived in the first century, wrote in the early second century, and was a hand picked Orthodox(Not gnostic at all) Bishop taught by the apostle John himself.

I'll grant you this: Of all the Catholic doctrines I have any knowledge of, there appears to be more support for Real Presence than for any of the rest. I still don't buy into it, and I don't believe the Apostles did, either. But at least for this doctrine, I can see some logic in your argument.

[TruthInCatholocism]

Thanks athanasius (who is 100 % correct)

[Scuba Pete]

So real presence as in physical presence or in spiritual presence?

Not that I see this as a mark of the "true" church. Jesus had his own way of telling who were real disciples.

[TruthInCatholocism]

I know you Dont Belive in Sola Scriptura But you do Belive the Bible is Infallible? That the words of Jesus Christ are Truths right?

And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me." And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood. (Luke 22:19-20)

Jesus therefore said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. (John 6:53-56)

What do you think?

Transubstansiation: the belief that after the consecration of the elements, the body and blood of Jesus Christ are really, truly and substantially in the sacrament of the Eucharist while its "accidents" (noticeable physical traits) do not change; this view is held by the Catholic Church

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by TruthInCatholocism

I know you Dont Belive in Sola Scriptura But you do Belive the Bible is Infallible? That the words of Jesus Christ are Truths right?

The scriptures NEVER claim to be perfect, why then should I assume that they are? As for Jesus' words' well he is the one thing that IS perfect.

Originally Posted by TruthInCatholocism

"He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. (John 6:53-56)

What do you think?

I think like MANY of the things Jesus referred to, this too is spiritual in nature and not physical. Just as we are not baptized with his physical blood, but with his spiritual blood. The Pharisees wanted to see the physical, and that was their downfall.

Originally Posted by TruthInCatholocism

Transubstansiation:

I don't find this word in the NT. Do you? Then why base your theology on it? Have you noticed that Jesus taught concepts that are simple? Faith, Hope and Love are what Christianity is really made of, and NOT a six syllable man made concept.

It's man's nature to COMPLICATE the Gospel. God is not impressed with complex theology or intricate scholarship. He told us that there was ONE true hallmark of a Christian. Our belief or rejection of transubstantiation was not that mark.

Romans 2:28 A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God. NIV

I hope this helps.

[TruthInCatholocism]

O_O Transubstansiation as in a term For what it is ... The True Presence..... How can you avoid Clear and plain Qoutes from Jesus himself....

Jesus in not using metephors... He is Quite Clear...

And furthermore

So... Jesus said "This is My Body" "This is my Blood" But.. He was just Joking...

Keep in mind... He lifted the Bread and said a prayer... He lifted His cup and said a prayer. He said Clea as day ... This Is My Blood ... This Is my Body ... He didnt say This cup is a representation of my Blood which will be shed for you ... this bread is a spirutual representation of my Body ... He did not say that at all .. Reading Back in scripture when jesus spoke "metephorically" or in parable he always went as far as to explain what he meant.. did he not? Why not here? because he was speaking Litteraly