sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I think you need to read, mark, and learn the biblical Tenet that God always chooses the one who is “unacceptable” to inherit — Jesus included.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What's in a name?
- Thread starter pearl
- Start date
And you have neglected to understand why Jesus was sent only to “the lost sheep” of the house of Israel”. As the ones through whom God was to bring their Messiah, he gave them first option at gaining places as “kings and priests” in his Kingdom. (Revelation 20:6)
Peter applied Exodus 19:6 to both Jewish and Gentile Christians. (1 Peter 2:6-10)
Feeling a level of contempt for those who were ‘not Jewish’, I believe, was a way to protect Jewish ‘separateness’. They were forbidden to marry unbelievers, because of the danger of being led into false worship (and their disobedience in this regard was demonstrated in their history).....so there was no tolerance for fraternising with worshippers of false gods. But having said that, Jesus demonstrated that when a Gentile showed genuine faith in him, he made exception and commended their faith....even fulfilling their requests for help.
My posts are simply a reiteration of what the Bible itself says about the Jews.....it means that the Bible and Jesus himself were anti-Semitic in their statements....so were they?
That seems to be the card played when people run out of excuses.
Perhaps you need to familiarise yourself with the parable of Luke 20:9-18?
There is no impediment for anyone of any nation to inherit the benefits of the coming Kingdom of God....but, according to scripture, one has to accept that Jesus was the Savior sent by God in order for that salvation to apply. No one who comes to Christ as a genuine disciple will ever be rejected on the grounds of nationality. How likely are the religious Jews to accept Jesus as Messiah after 2000 years of denying him? I believe that you are out of the excuses.....and so are they.
If you understand that God has a “people” today who are called by his name (Acts 15:14) and that this collective is made up of people of all ‘tongues, tribes and nations’, then there is no “anti” anyone, except those who reject Jesus as the Christ, or who take up a form of Christianity that fails to “do the will of God”. (Matthew 7:21-23) The Bible makes that clear. (Acts 4:12)
Acts 3:13-20.....Peter said to his fellow Jews....
“The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified his servant Jesus, whom you delivered over and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release him. But you denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, and you killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we are witnesses. And his name—by faith in his name—has made this man strong whom you see and know, and the faith that is through Jesus has given the man this perfect health in the presence of you all. “And now, brothers, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did also your rulers. But what God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ would suffer, he thus fulfilled. Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus”. (ESV)
Do you see his plea here for a repentance that has never come, except by individuals who saw the need.
That is what the scriptures tell us....I have presented them in all my posts. I ask you and @sojourner to please argue with them.....something neither of you have done to date. Sometimes the truth is painful, and not what you want to hear....but putting your fingers in your ears won’t make it go away.
Last edited:
I have too much respect for Scripture to cherry pick, reducing it to a tit for tat argument, especially with someone who has weaponized it against those who do not believe as they do. As far as I can tell, you accept Scripture as understood with the 1st cent mentality and have closed it off any critical study.
Seriously?....if you had any respect for scripture then you would understand exactly what it is saying. How much scripture have you been given, only to cop out with an accusation of “cherry picking”?.....you obviously find the cherries a bit sour? Is that because you cherry pick what appeals to your palate? Please tell me what in the scriptures that you have been given, God disagrees with.....?
At Hebrews 4:12-13, after reminding his Jewish audience of the failures of their forefathers in the wilderness Paul said...
“For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account.” (ESV)
‘The word of God is a sword’ (not a powder puff) that can ‘discern the thoughts and intentions of the heart.’ Forcing it to say what you want to hear is not what scripture is for. You have to ignore a whole lot of what it says to maintain your stance. You apparently know the doctrines of your church but are showing me that you really know very little about the Bible and what it teaches about salvation.....how it applies....and to whom.
If we have no idea what precludes us from gaining salvation, and have a closed mind to what the scriptures really teach, then Matthew 7:21-23 looms for all of us.....a complete rejection by Jesus, who told us to obey his teachings. Christendom fails on every level.....hopelessly fractured and in disunity, how can they possibly think that Jesus walks among them? The moment bloodshed entered the “church”....the moment that they started to meddle in politics.....Christ left the building. (John 17:16; James 4:4; Isaiah 1:15)
No one can judge another or tell them what to believe....as Jesus himself demonstrated, all we can do is tell them what the scriptures teach and let them decide for themselves.....the scriptures themselves will reveal “the thoughts and intentions of the heart”.
First century mentality? You mean what Jesus and the apostles taught? What has changed? Can you tell me?
What is “critical study” and who carried it out? Do you know? Are the thoughts and opinions of men somehow more important than the uncomfortable word of God? We must all be the judge of that.
Yes, seriously.
It is men who penned the Bible with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. And it was not completed in one writing but stages in the formation of the Gospels.
1 The life and teaching of Jesus; the Church holds firmly that the four Gospels, 'whose historicity it unhesitatingly affirms, faithfully hand on what Jesus, the Son of God, while he lived among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation, until the day when he was taken up.
2 the oral tradition. For after the ascension the Lord, the apostles handed on to their hearers what he had said and done, but with that fuller understanding which they, instructed by the glorious events of Christ and enlightened by the Spirit of truth, now enjoyed,
3 The written Gospels. The sacred authors, in writing the four Gospels, selected certain of the many elements which had been handed on, either orally or already in written form, others they synthesized or explained with an eye to the situation of the churches, while sustaining the form of preaching, but always in such a fashion that they gave told us the honest truth about Jesus.
For Roman Catholics, inerrancy is understood as a consequence of biblical inspiration, it has to do more with the truth of the Bible as a whole than with any theory of verbal inerrancy. 'The books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching firmly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into the sacred writings for the sake of our salvation'.
Understanding Scripture in the 20th cent as in the 1st cent gave the world permission to ignore, deny the reality of Shoah.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
The JW's persistently ignore Jesus own words: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind," before also paraphrasing a second passage; "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." These are Jesus' Commandments.
From there, what remains is the application of those Commandments, which sometimes can be at least somewhat variable. But what the JW's constantly do is to keep adding "commandments" and then trying to justify them under Jewish Law, which Gentiles are not under. And when asked why they don't believe in all the Jewish Laws, all one then hears from the JW's are the sounds of crickets.
Again, Jesus' basic message is the love of God and neighbor, but the Governing Body tells their flock that this is not enough. Well, apparently it was good enough for Jesus.
From there, what remains is the application of those Commandments, which sometimes can be at least somewhat variable. But what the JW's constantly do is to keep adding "commandments" and then trying to justify them under Jewish Law, which Gentiles are not under. And when asked why they don't believe in all the Jewish Laws, all one then hears from the JW's are the sounds of crickets.
Again, Jesus' basic message is the love of God and neighbor, but the Governing Body tells their flock that this is not enough. Well, apparently it was good enough for Jesus.
Apparently, this 'Governing Body' also for its members determines, authoritatively, the acceptance of one and only one interpretation, theirs, of the whole of Scripture, each and every verse.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Exactly, and the Governing Body must be obeyed or there can be serious repercussions. Even going to check out another denomination and/or reading other denomination's reading materials could lead to shunning or even "disfellowshipping":
Formal discipline is administered by congregation elders. When a baptized member is accused of committing a serious sin—usually cases of sexual misconduct[125][253] or charges of apostasy for disputing Jehovah's Witness doctrines[254][255]—a judicial committee is formed to determine guilt, provide help and possibly administer discipline. Disfellowshipping, a form of shunning, is the strongest form of discipline, administered to an offender deemed unrepentant.[256] Contact with disfellowshipped individuals is limited to direct family members living in the same home, and with congregation elders who may invite disfellowshipped persons to apply for reinstatement;[257] formal business dealings may continue if contractually or financially obliged.[258] Witnesses are taught that avoiding social and spiritual interaction with disfellowshipped individuals keeps the congregation free from immoral influence and that "losing precious fellowship with loved ones may help [the shunned individual] to come 'to his senses,' see the seriousness of his wrong, and take steps to return to Jehovah."[259] The practice of shunning may also serve to deter other members from dissident behavior.[260] Members who disassociate (formally resign) are described in Watch Tower Society literature as wicked and are also shunned.[261][262][263] Expelled individuals may eventually be reinstated to the congregation if deemed repentant by elders in the congregation in which the disfellowshipping was enforced.[24] Reproof is a lesser form of discipline given formally by a judicial committee to a baptized Witness who is considered repentant of serious sin; the reproved person temporarily loses conspicuous privileges of service, but suffers no restriction of social or spiritual fellowship.[264] Marking, a curtailing of social but not spiritual fellowship, is practiced if a baptized member persists in a course of action regarded as a violation of Bible principles but not a serious sin. -- Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia
Any Bible student knows this....the Hebrew Scriptures (OT) are vital in giving us the whole picture of why Jesus needed to come as “Redeemer” in the first place.....and what scriptural ‘credentials’ he needed to prove his identity. We also have a history of why God chose Israel, and a ‘warts and all’ documentation of their problematic history in keeping God’s commands to them.
The Greek Scriptures (NT) are an account of Christ’s teachings....his exposure of the Pharisees as apostate teachers who had led Israel away from God by their endless nit-picking additions to God’s clear instructions. The apostles only taught what Jesus taught them. No additions were necessary.
No matter who God used to compile the books of the Bible, it is God’s Word, not man’s. All of its writers were Jewish....all servants of the same God.....Yahweh.
Since when has Christendom ‘held firmly’ to the gospels?
When Roman Catholicism was declared the “State Religion” of Rome by a pagan Emperor, what emerged was anything but a ‘firm grip on the gospels’. It did not resemble the first century model in any way, but was a disgusting fusion of weakened Christianity with pagan Roman sun worship....still in clear evidence to this day.
That is true, but it was lost in a gross apostasy, just as Jesus and the apostles had foretold.....(2 Thessalonians 2:3; 2 Peter 2:1-3; 1 Timothy 4:1-3; Acts 20:30)
Jesus said we are to judge true Christians by their “fruits”....and a brief look at the history of “the church” from the second century onwards will reveal some very disgraceful ‘fruitage’.....any wonder that Jesus will say he “never knew” those “many” who claim him as their “Lord” but whose actions and teachings go against everything he taught. (Matthew 7:21-23)
The scriptures are God’s only communication with mankind....his spirit directed their understanding of those scriptures....he never added anything to them, but simply added more light to what was already there. (Proverbs 4:18) “Traditions of men” had no place. (Matthew 15:8-9)
And what a shame that “the church” never lived up to that biblical standard.
Paul wrote....
“For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God. I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another.” (1 Corinthians 4:4-6 ESV)
Even though Paul was not aware of anything against himself, he was aware that humans can be easily fooled about their standing with God.....at the time of the Lord’s return, he said that Jesus, as God’s appointed judge, would “bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart”.
You seem to have no idea how far your church has strayed from the path that was set by Jesus and the Apostles for all of Christ’s disciples. You honestly believe what you have been taught about God the Father....about who Jesus is.....about what role the holy spirit plays....what role Mary plays in Christian worship.....what constitutes a “saint”......where a “Pope” ever figured in original Christianity?....what a “soul” is....where the dead go, to heaven, hell or purgatory?....and what constitutes true worship and what clearly doesn’t? Can you tell me what scripture forms the basis of all your accepted doctrines? I cannot find any.
Then there is the adoption of pagan festivals, given a thin veneer of authenticity by renaming them with a “Christian” label, but which are clearly nothing to do with Jesus Christ. (2 Corinthians 6:14-18)
The departure from what Christ taught.....is absolute IMO.
If this is a reference to the “Holocaust” then what does it have to do with anything but God’s abandonment of a people who could never be told what to do?
Reading the history of the Jews in their own scripture, it is hard to comprehend how they could have got it so wrong, so often, and even when the punishment was severe, the lesson never lasted long. God did not choose Israel because they were somehow a superior race....he chose them in order to be able to bring his Messiah into the world through a particular family line, in a certain tribe and in a certain place....something over which the Messiah himself had no control. In order to prove who he was, this was essential. But once these very people with a sad and sorry history of disobedience had fulfilled their purpose and had actually orchestrated the murder of their own Savior, God dispensed with them as the scriptures amply demonstrate. (Matthew 23:37-39)
As a nation they are “part of the world” that Jesus said was ruled by the devil (1 John 5:19)......blood spillers like all the rest. (Isaiah 1:15)
God’s “people” today are made up of Jews and Gentiles who accept Jesus Christ as “the seed of Abraham”.....these are “the Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16) those chosen to rule with Christ in his Kingdom.....so if that is not what people want to hear.....they can argue with Scripture.....I cannot see how they have a leg to stand on. The truth is not “anti-Semitic”......untruth is “anti-Christ”.
The Church has never claimed the all of its doctrines are found in Scripture. But for this Church you hate so much you would have no Christian Scripture.
I don't expect you to make the connection because, " I use JW.ORG for explanations and additional information."
Well, I guess that is just as well because their beliefs do not come from scripture at all....nor any teaching of Jesus Christ.....so who does that leave? Could it possibly be the "weeds" that Christ foretold? These counterfeits were not planted recently.....in fact this apostasy was trying to make headway in the days of the apostles. As soon as they passed away, there was no stopping those weeds from spreading all over the world.
I do have an intense dislike for those who misrepresent the truth, and who teach lies and pass them off as "Christian" truth. But I have no hatred for the people who have been taken in by them....just pity.
Yes, just as I assume that you use the Catholic church for your own views?
Seriously, I have not seen you defend a single belief to date. It isn't what you say, its what you ignore that tells the story. History is repeating but you can't see it.....or is it 'don't want to see' what is staring you in the face?
Those who love the truth cannot love lies....nor can they love what God hates.
If you have made your choice then so be it.....I have made mine. Let Jesus be the judge.
Interesting, so you concede that the Scripture you love to quote from is indeed penned by the very Church you hate.
The word 'sacrament' is not found in NT, yet most of Christianity celebrates Baptism and Eucharist with liturgical rites. Yet there is little evidence that Jesus baptized during his ministry, the synoptic gospels are totally silent on the subject. The statement in John 3:22 that Jesus did baptize is offset by the affirmation in john 4:2 that he did not. The institution of baptism has been connected with the post-resurrectional directive in Mt 28:19, "Make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit". The three Synoptic Gospels and Paul agree that on the night before Jesus died he took bread and wine and interpreted them in terms of his own flesh and blood, recognition that the practice of the eucharist was according to the mind of Jesus and following out his intention. Did Jesus envision such a long time before the end of time in which we would 'do this in memory of him'?
There is no evidence in the language of Jesus that he thought about a priesthood replacing the Jewish priesthood in the Temple. He had disciples and sent them out on mission, among the disciples he called the Twelve to sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, but he designated none of his followers as priests. Even with such little evidence it is possible that a development in which there was a gradual regularization of those who could be presiders until the ordained clergy alone had that role, and a gradual designation of that clergy as priests.
You judge the Church of which you know nothing about other than through gossip of those equally ignorant of the Church. You belong to an organization that is closed in on itself, restricted of meaningful dialogue with other Christians or faiths.
Yes, just as I assume that you use the Catholic church for your own views?
Depends on what I'm looking for. When comes to Scripture I enjoy a collaborative work with other Christian authors, enriching faith, many Jewish authors.
Belief has to do with faith, of which religion is an expression and an acceptance.
“There is no reverence for God without reverence for man. Love of man is the way to the love of God.” Abraham Heschel 'God in Search of Man'
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Ditto, but please realize that the JW's are forbidden to do this, nor at they allowed to visit other denominations and check out what their services are like. The JW's are a true "cult", and two sets of my neighbors who left them also attest to this.
A great book, imo, and I read it not long before getting back from my sponsored study of the Holocaust in Poland and Israel for three weeks, so it was very pertinent with that as well.
BTW, I couldn't help but notice the lie posted by someone you were discussing this with, whereas we supposedly worship the sun-- the JW lies just keep going on and on and on and...
Last edited:
Of course, I realize this.
If you're a fan of Heschel or Merton you might enjoy this;
Abraham Heschel and the Catholic Heart
(PDF) Abraham Heschel and the Catholic Heart (researchgate.net)
I have already addressed this.....the Bible is not a product of the Catholic Church.....not a word in it was written by a Catholic. All it’s writers were Jewish.....
As he has done in the past, God can use even his enemies to accomplish his will. I would like to remind you that your church kept the Bible away from their flocks and even murdered people who dared to want to read the scriptures for themselves. The common people were kept in ignorance for centuries. It took the Reformation to get the Bible back into the hands of the people. Only then could they check for themselves whether their church had been teaching them the truth.....and guess what they discovered? A long list of departures from Jesus’ teachings.
Where does the word “Eucharist” come from?
The following is from a Catholic website....
“The Greek word “ευχαριστησας” is “eukaristos” (or “eucharistēsas”) which means “to give thanks”, and as you can see very clearly “Eucharist” is not a made-up word and is found in the Bible. This is where the Church that Jesus Christ himself founded, the Catholic Church, derived the name it gave to its most profound and intimate sacrament: the Eucharist.”
What was the emphasis on when Jesus offered the bread and wine at the last supper? Was it the prayer of thanks, which was given at all meals as a matter of course, or was it the bread and wine themselves as symbols of Christ’s flesh and blood, given in our behalf to atone for the sin the of Adam that we inherited? (Romans 5:12)
This was the institution of the New Covenant and it was not the prayer of thanks that was the focus, but the emblems of the bread and the wine as the means God provided for the salvation of those who “do the will of the Father”. (Matthew 7:21-23)
The issue of transubstantiation then rears it’s head because the Catholic church turns its eucharist into cannibalism and drinking blood which were forbidden under God’s law. It is one of the more sickening aspects of its belief system.....along with hell and the adoration of images....and it’s misrepresentation of Mary’s role as a mediator. The Catholic church also has no idea what a “saint” is and how they are chosen.
This is the “weeds” at work, just as Jesus foretold.
There is no way that Jesus meant that the bread and wine became his literal flesh and blood.....that is thoroughly repugnant.
The Lord’s Supper was the celebration of the Passover, used as a model for a continued remembrance of him as “the Lamb of God” whose blood saves those who put their faith in it.
The Passover was an annual celebration.....an anniversary is kept on the same date every year, as the Passover was and still is. The memorial of Jesus’ death would also be commemorated on the anniversary date. Easter has nothing to do with Jesus....and is yet another degrading adoption from paganism.
Baptism was a very important aspect of becoming a “Christian”, but it’s not the act of baptism that saves anyone.....it’s what baptism symbolizes. It has to be a choice based on a commitment to be a disciple of Christ, in actions not just wearing a label and following mindless ritual. Baptizing infants is meaningless, because you cannot commit to Christ by proxy. And full immersion is what is required....hardly something you could do to an infant.
I hope you understand that Jesus did not tell his apostles and disciples all there was to know during his three and a half year ministry....(John 6:12) Only after his death and resurrection was the Holy Spirit poured out on the disciples, anointing them and revealing all that they needed to know at that time. Only then did they realise what Jesus meant about the Kingdom of God and their role in it.
I have studied the Bible with many Catholic people who were raised in the church and came to realise that its past and present conduct was not in harmony with what Jesus taught at all.
When I asked them to get their Bible out so that we could explore the scriptures, many came back with a catechism, not really understanding the difference. They had never read the Ten Commandments and seen it’s prohibition on the making of religious images....or understood that Mary was not “the mother of God”. Most Catholic people are completely ignorant of the Bible but taught to repeat phrases that are totally meaningless. They walked into church spiritually empty, and walked out the same way....but didn’t know why.
Now that the church can no longer hide behind the ignorance of the people, those who respect the Bible want to know what it says.
Many are shocked at their church’s level of departure from the scriptures.
Once they find out that they have been lied to all their lives, they express great anger about that and develop a genuine appreciation for what the Bible teaches.....as Jesus said...’the truth sets you free’.
You might....but does your church? What are they looking for? If you claim membership of any church, you bear responsibility for their teachings and conduct because you consent to it.....you are part of it. (Revelation 18:4-5)
I want to address this garbage.....I love nothing more than to check out the websites of those who purport to worship the same God as I do.....like myself, a good portion of Jehovah’s Witnesses have come out of Christendom’s churches....so we get first hand accounts of what their former religions taught and believed, as well as checking for ourselves what they believe from their own sources. It pays to get your information from the organization themselves.
Those seen as “apostates” are never popular with the religions that they have left, so when it comes to hear-say, it is good to use the scriptures to see if a departure is about the church that was abandoned, or the conduct of those who defected. One side of a story is never something upheld in a court of law, so why is one side of a story accepted here?
I have had a lot of Catholic neighbors in my time, but should I have used the conduct of those who identified as Catholic, but who never lived as Christians.....(carrying on with appalling behavior,) to judge all Catholics? Some of them were lovely people. I have neighbors right now who are staunch Catholics. These people found out that I was a JW before we moved in and poisoned all the neighbors with lies about us, so that no one wanted to know us. It wasn’t until one of them needed assistance and I was able to help, that they even spoke to me. After that encounter, we became good friends and neighbors. She too was a staunch Catholic. Others in the street came to see that this other neighbor had spitefully lied about us, and now they have to bear that responsibility as known gossips and a bigots. It has humbled them somewhat.
I have no hatred for Catholic people...only for the institution who has misled them....the same feelings that Jesus had for the religious leaders of his day who were doing the same thing.
What I stated is that the word sacrament was not in the Bible.
He offered his flesh and blood, within the Jewish liturgy of Passover. It was not then a 'sacrament' as he was still alive.
This may be the one area where there is agreement. I fully believe there exists a real and unique presence in the Eucharist. Jesus' words couldn't have been plainer, holding the bread, 'This is my flesh', the wine, 'This is my blood'.
Matthew 26:17-30
Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?” And He said, “Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, ‘The Teacher says, “My time is near; I am to keep the Passover at your house with My disciples.”’” The disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover.
Mark 14:22-24
While they were eating, He took some bread, and after a blessing He broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is My body.” And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, and they all drank from it. And He said to them, “This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.
Luke 13:26
Verse Concepts
Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught in our streets’;
Luke 22:19-20
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.
John 6:35
Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.
John 6:51
I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”
John 6:53-57
So Jesus 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.
Nowhere does Jesus state or imply that what he instituted was merely a symbol.
I do agree that the Church's attempt to define what is a mystery, and accepted as such, until the Reformation, was an unfortunate attempt to explain the 'how'.
Imagine that, you preyed on those who did not know their own faith.
Exactly, and the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit in its constant interpretation for what it means for the life of Christians today and future generations, and every culture. Its why it is not closed in on itself, does not stagnate, but renews and develops its doctrine throughout the ages.
Just more of your anti Catholic dribble.
The Church is in dialogue with most if not all religions, unlike JWs there is nothing to fear, learning from conversing with others.
The Bible did not come down from heaven, whole and intact, given by the Holy Spirit. Just as the experience and faith of Israel developed its sacred books, so was the early Christian Church the matrix of the Christian Scripture. The Catholic Church has authoritatively told us which books are inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore canonical. The Bible, then, is the church's book. The Christian Scripture did not come before the church, but from the church. Peter and the other apostles were given special authority to teach and govern before Scripture was written. The first generation of Christians had no Christian Scripture at all, only Hebrew Scripture -- but they were the church then, must as we are the church today. All that you quote from you have received from the Church.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I don't believe replacement theology gives anyone the right to act contrary to the love of God.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe those theologians must have been brain dead because the words of Jesus are clear.