Becomes completely the body and blood of Christ.? Christ body never saw corruption. Does the bread and wine corrupt in the human body.?.The flesh of Christ was not corruptible but bread and wine is corrubtible. Does Christ corrupt in bread and wine is that possible? You cannot have it both ways in appearance the same but mystically Christ the incorruptible becomes corruptible in bread and wine ?. If the corrubtible corrupts in bread and wine,hence so does Christ, which is impossible.
When the accidents (the appearance of bread and wine) corrupts, it ceases to be the body and blood of christ. So no the body and blood do not corrupt because once the appearance corrupts it is nolonger christ's body and blood so the corruption never touches the body and blood. Also it should be interesting to note that there have been eucharistic miralces where hosts whould bleed and turn to human flesh and remain incorruptible even after hundreds of years
@OneTrueChurch Man is corrupt when receiving the sacrament so he cannot be receiving the body and blood according to your explanation Once the incorruptible touches the corruptible it is defiled. The Nature of God which is all His Virtues can never be satisfied by mystical atonements. Christ is the only exclusive equality to all whom God is in Virtue: His Character. No ceremony or religious activity can accomplish the Virtues of Christ Person in death, satisfying God's Nature for appeasement.
I will give you the point that one should not criticize a doctrine without understanding it. I had a hard time trying to understand consubstantiation when I studied Martin Luther. However, I do not criticize any of the four major views of the Lord's Supper: transubstantiation, consubstantiation (physical presence), only spiritual presence, or only a memorial. Priest means a maker of sacrifice.
Jhn 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life. \
rc might have said it all along but the words of jesus said 1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.
funny how cathlics dont go along with the bible but they take one verse out of context and read the hole chapter silly people why not read the bible all of it why have over 70 books and you dont ever study the 66
Christ is saying that the bread and the wine are symbollically the body and blood. THe idea that it looks like bread still while actually being flesh is gross and silly. Why wouldn't it look like flesh? Christ meant for us to take the bread and wine in remembrance of him, thats it.
There are plenty of miracles in history in which the bread did turn into flesh. I mean to take in God in such a physical way proves Gods love for us in totality.
Suggest reading John Dominic Crossan's book THE HISTORICAL JESUS - LIFE OF A MEDITERRANEAN JEWISH PEASANT. The Early Jesus Movement was totally different from today's Roman Catholic Church. Many of the traditions of the RCC come from the house church movement where pagan philosophy and mystery religion fused into today's faith. Scripture has had many rewrites. The idea of a central church didn't happen till Constantine created Christianity as a state church and organized it like the Roman Army.
Your logic is circular...you cite Catholic references to prove Catholic Positions. Please realize that there were many Christian Churches prior to 325 AD with many different beliefs. Why not quote these eg. Orthodox, Coptic, etc. ? You'll find different conclusions. Please also remember that the Catholic Clergy forged many letters and documents to prove their theology or rewrote ancient authors
to advance Papal Power. Let's stick to archeology to prove theology~Apologetics are ingenenous.
the fact that the vatican and the pope can change the catholic church and the behaviors the church demands shows that the behaviors are not sought by god but sought by man. the pope cant change the keys to heaven, but he did.
OneTrueChurch is correct. Matzo is unleaven bread.
I copy and paste this from a Jewish website.
Matzah is a crisp, flat, unleavened bread, made of flour and water, which must be baked before the dough has had time to rise. It is the only type of "bread" which Jews may eat during Passover, and it must be made specifically for Passover use, under rabbinical supervision.
Exodos 23:15 You will observe the feast of Unleavened Bread. For seven days you will eat unleavened bread, as I have commanded you, at the appointed time...
Exodos 23:18 'You will not offer the blood of my vitim with LEAVENED BREAD, nor will the fat of my feast be kept till the following day.
"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110).
For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (A.D. 110-165).
On the other hand, Orthodox Church explicitly forbids the use of unleavened bread for Eucharist as pertaining to the Old Testament and allows only for bread with yeast, as a symbol of the New. Indeed, this was one of the three points of contention that brought about the schism between Eastern and Western churches in 1054.
The term unleavened breads can also refer to breads which are not prepared with leavening agents. These flatbreads holds special religious significance to adherents of Judaism and Christianity. Jews consume unleavened breads such as Matzo during Passover.
They are also used in the Western Christan liturgy when Roman-Catholics celebrate the Eucharist.
Childinfaith-"I don't see what kind of bread you use makes any sort of theological difference"
It is Catholicism's claim that the bread becomes Christ's body; in that sense it should be of utmost importance because Christ was "pierced" and by His "stripes" we are healed. Matzah is striped and pierced; the Communion wafer is not.
The importance is the substance of it becoming Christ's body, not what it looks like. The Eastern rite and Orthodox Church use leavened square pieces of bread dipped in the wine. It makes absolutly no difference to what happens to the bread. Simply because it doesn't have a cute little design of stripes and piecings doesn't make it any less Christ's body. What you are simply doing is making a mountain out of a molehill.
@OneTrueChurch I agree. I was Catholic for 32 years. I once bought matzos on sale after a Pesach (Passover), and I found them so dry. I suppose one drinks the wine with them to moisten them!
Transubstatiation links Catholicism with Judaism because the Last Supper was a Seder. Easter occurs after a full moon because Pesach is on the 14 Nisan, and it occurs around a full moon. (All Jewish months begin with a new moon.)
mannyfit75-The unleavened bread should be matzahs which is not only unleavened, but striped and pierced. Again, it is Catholicism's claim that it becomes Christ's body - and it was striped and pierced.
I like to add St. Ignatius words as well. He was taught by St. John the Apostle.
They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."
"Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.
1 thing I should point out. Heresy can only be taught by someone who was once Catholic. Unless christianstudents was Catholic and then left the Church, he can't be a heretic.
God is real..religion is just something to make people feel better. There ya go i didnt even have to make a long winded video about it. Dont fear the truth people
Sadly but true,I've had Catholics call me a "Jesus Freak" saying I talk too much about Him and that there are other things in life besides Him,while others have said:The Bible was written by man so you can't go by everything you read." Imagine that!This is coming out of the mouths of His "chosen" church???
there are many people claiming to be catholic that arn't truly catholic. Besides, being born into a catholic family doesn't automatically put you in good standing with the church, one must follow all that the church has taught.
Following Jesus is not a laundry list of "things" or rituals that you have to check off in order to be saved! This would make His love conditional and something to "earn",but then again you believe that He only loves and will save only those Catholic,while other Christians are doomed.I have seen more faith and obedience in many Christians who are not of this denomination as well,so what will their outcome be?
beleiving in jesus means believing and following all that he has commanded us. all of the "things" and "rituals" which the catholic church follows have been given to us by christ for the salvation of souls.
Dont u think that Jesus wud have said ti the apostles''i dont really mean that this bread is my body it only symbolises it!!'' at the last supper??He didnt for a simple reason!He really meant that the bread will become his flesh and the wine his blood!!The Church called this Transtubstanciation!!(spelled wrong i think??)Its a mircle!!We will never fully understand it but it happens everytime a priest says a mass!!!
Yes He said "this is my body" Not "I just changed this piece of bread to contain my presence" Or "I just changed the substance of this piece of bread into a piece of my body" He was clearly using it as a way to remember Him being broken for us and His Blood spilled.
history testifies that when jesus said "this is my body" and "this is my blood" that the bread and wine were changed into the substance of his body and blood. this is the teaching of ALL the anchient fathers. The symbolic eucharist teaching is less then 500 years old! BTW, where in the bible does it say anything about a symbolic eucharist? It doesn't.
Yes and Paul said there were Heretivs "in" the early church. Just because it was around during the begining of the CHurch does not make it valid. There is a reason why we say "show me in the Bible"
ok christianstudents can you "show me in the bible" where it says that all christian beliefs must be in the bible? Can you "show me in the bible" where it says that God's word has only been given to us in the written form? Can you "show me in the bible" where its says that scripture ALONE is our final authority? Can you "show me in the bible" where it says that the eucharist is only a symbol?
When not in line with God's Word,it is easy to see how people go astray and believe in false teachers and doctrines. If you get a chance,please take a look at Jose Luis De Jesus on Youtube and see just what happens when people aren't given the Truth from their leaders-they become open to "wolves". And yet people will say Scriptures aren't as important as Church doctrine? The Scriptures will save lives!
i never said that that scriptures are less important than churc h doctrine. As far as I'm concerned, scripture and tradition are two sides to the same coin. In fact if it wasn't for church tradition, you wouldn't have the new testament that we hold dear.
True, there were heretics in the early Church. But there were also real Christians in the early Church. If the Real Presence/Transubstantiation were heresy, there would be people in the early Church who did not beleive in it.
Yet this is not so. All of the early Church Fathers beleived in the Real Presence.
The only people in the early Church who didn't beleive in the Real Presence were people like the Gnostics and Docetists, who taught that matter is evil!
No, the Eucharist does not remain a wafer and wine. It APPEARS to be a wafer and wine, but, in fact, it is the Body and Blood of Christ.
In the words of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, "[T]he seeming bread is not bread, though sensible to taste, but the Body of Christ; and that the seeming wine is not wine, though the taste will have it so, but the Blood of Christ."
And the miracles in the New Testament also happened.
You have spoken well.We partake of communion in the Non-denominational churches as well,but to "remember Him" as HE HIMSELF said,not to literally eat and drink Him. Jesus said He would not return until His appointed time by the Father(The Rapture),it doesn't say "except to become present in the bread of the Catholic church on Sundays." He meant what He said concerning WHEN He'd return and He will not leave His place until then!
you are making a false dicotomy between the rememberance of christ and his real presence. its not "either or" its "both and".
yes jesus is going to come again but this doesn't mean he cannot also be with us in the lord's supper. BTW, the rapture is nowhere mentioned in scripture, so if you are going to critisize catholic teaching as being "unscriptural" then you should also critisize your own teaching.
Anyhow,concerning what is and is not in talking about The Rapture and Purgatory,the 2 are Apples and Oranges. The Bible speaks of HOW Jesus will return (Also look at the defintion of the word Rapture),but the Bible doesn't even give a reference to a 3rd place or a "holding cell" the church calls Purgatory.
yes it does. in 1 corinthians 3:15 it talks about a person on the day of judgement having to pass though fire and recieving loss for the bad works which tey have done. this is purgatory.
That scripture in no way indicates a purgatory. Jesus said we would know falsehood by its fruits. I implore you to examine the fruits of roman catholicism and the vatican. Also The pope himself said that Muslims, Buddhist etc are all praying to same God. We know that is false. If you believe that then please disregard my comment as it would be of no use to you.
christianstudents, do u always twist doctrine to support your heretic beliefs. The symbolic eucharist has only been celebrated for about 200 years. Even martin Luther didn't believe in just a symbolic eucharist!
"He was clearly using it as a way to remember Him being broken for us and His Blood spilled." That does not fit...,if it was so clear why did "The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?'" (John 6:51--52).
Why didn't Jesus "clarify" this to the crowd. If it was understood only as a symbol why would the Crowd turn away?
"And do not call ANYONE on earth 'father',for you have ONE Father,and He is in heaven." (Matthew 23:9)
I guess this was just written only for us non-Catholic "heathens" and the Catholics are the exception here right? or maybe He just forgot to add that "missing" part in there??? Give me a break!!!
christianstudents, i showed you how the early church fathers believed the same thing about the eucharist. Why do you constantly go against what the ancient fathers said
give me a break. I said "in disguise" so that you might be able to understand what happens durring the consecration. Can you attept to refute anything I said?
Becomes completely the body and blood of Christ.? Christ body never saw corruption. Does the bread and wine corrupt in the human body.?.The flesh of Christ was not corruptible but bread and wine is corrubtible. Does Christ corrupt in bread and wine is that possible? You cannot have it both ways in appearance the same but mystically Christ the incorruptible becomes corruptible in bread and wine ?. If the corrubtible corrupts in bread and wine,hence so does Christ, which is impossible.
polopowers1 11 months ago
@polopowers1
When the accidents (the appearance of bread and wine) corrupts, it ceases to be the body and blood of christ. So no the body and blood do not corrupt because once the appearance corrupts it is nolonger christ's body and blood so the corruption never touches the body and blood. Also it should be interesting to note that there have been eucharistic miralces where hosts whould bleed and turn to human flesh and remain incorruptible even after hundreds of years
OneTrueChurch 11 months ago
@OneTrueChurch Man is corrupt when receiving the sacrament so he cannot be receiving the body and blood according to your explanation Once the incorruptible touches the corruptible it is defiled. The Nature of God which is all His Virtues can never be satisfied by mystical atonements. Christ is the only exclusive equality to all whom God is in Virtue: His Character. No ceremony or religious activity can accomplish the Virtues of Christ Person in death, satisfying God's Nature for appeasement.
polopowers1 11 months ago
I will give you the point that one should not criticize a doctrine without understanding it. I had a hard time trying to understand consubstantiation when I studied Martin Luther. However, I do not criticize any of the four major views of the Lord's Supper: transubstantiation, consubstantiation (physical presence), only spiritual presence, or only a memorial. Priest means a maker of sacrifice.
BuddyNovinski 1 year ago
Jhn 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life. \
rc might have said it all along but the words of jesus said 1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.
beingther 1 year ago
@beingther this is why one must go by the bible and not mans traditions
beingther 1 year ago
funny how cathlics dont go along with the bible but they take one verse out of context and read the hole chapter silly people why not read the bible all of it why have over 70 books and you dont ever study the 66
beingther 2 years ago
Christ is saying that the bread and the wine are symbollically the body and blood. THe idea that it looks like bread still while actually being flesh is gross and silly. Why wouldn't it look like flesh? Christ meant for us to take the bread and wine in remembrance of him, thats it.
Catherine4561 2 years ago
There are plenty of miracles in history in which the bread did turn into flesh. I mean to take in God in such a physical way proves Gods love for us in totality.
RockyBalboa211 2 years ago
Suggest reading John Dominic Crossan's book THE HISTORICAL JESUS - LIFE OF A MEDITERRANEAN JEWISH PEASANT. The Early Jesus Movement was totally different from today's Roman Catholic Church. Many of the traditions of the RCC come from the house church movement where pagan philosophy and mystery religion fused into today's faith. Scripture has had many rewrites. The idea of a central church didn't happen till Constantine created Christianity as a state church and organized it like the Roman Army.
cloudsurfer007 2 years ago
Your logic is circular...you cite Catholic references to prove Catholic Positions. Please realize that there were many Christian Churches prior to 325 AD with many different beliefs. Why not quote these eg. Orthodox, Coptic, etc. ? You'll find different conclusions. Please also remember that the Catholic Clergy forged many letters and documents to prove their theology or rewrote ancient authors
to advance Papal Power. Let's stick to archeology to prove theology~Apologetics are ingenenous.
cloudsurfer007 2 years ago
What do you mean cloud? Please explain
RickySyxx6 2 years ago
the fact that the vatican and the pope can change the catholic church and the behaviors the church demands shows that the behaviors are not sought by god but sought by man. the pope cant change the keys to heaven, but he did.
errskin 2 years ago
OneTrueChurch is correct. Matzo is unleaven bread.
I copy and paste this from a Jewish website.
Matzah is a crisp, flat, unleavened bread, made of flour and water, which must be baked before the dough has had time to rise. It is the only type of "bread" which Jews may eat during Passover, and it must be made specifically for Passover use, under rabbinical supervision.
mannyfit75 2 years ago
Exodos 23:15 You will observe the feast of Unleavened Bread. For seven days you will eat unleavened bread, as I have commanded you, at the appointed time...
Exodos 23:18 'You will not offer the blood of my vitim with LEAVENED BREAD, nor will the fat of my feast be kept till the following day.
Just some scriptural prove of what your writting.
edman715 2 years ago
"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110).
mannyfit75 2 years ago
For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (A.D. 110-165).
mannyfit75 2 years ago
Nanhei, according to who and who's authority?
Second, the Catholic Church is not the only Church who affirms the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.
The Eastern Orthodox also believe in it not to mention the Early Church Fathers.
mannyfit75 2 years ago
On the other hand, Orthodox Church explicitly forbids the use of unleavened bread for Eucharist as pertaining to the Old Testament and allows only for bread with yeast, as a symbol of the New. Indeed, this was one of the three points of contention that brought about the schism between Eastern and Western churches in 1054.
mannyfit75 2 years ago
The term unleavened breads can also refer to breads which are not prepared with leavening agents. These flatbreads holds special religious significance to adherents of Judaism and Christianity. Jews consume unleavened breads such as Matzo during Passover.
They are also used in the Western Christan liturgy when Roman-Catholics celebrate the Eucharist.
mannyfit75 2 years ago
I have a question: Why does Catholicism not use the same bread Jesus did? (Matzos)
nanhei 3 years ago
we use unleavened wafers, which are practically the same thing just with a smoother texture
OneTrueChurch 3 years ago
"Practially the same thing"
No, they're not. They are very different. Matzos is big and square, striped and pierced (like the Savior) and crumbly when broken.
Watch "Matzah | PassOVER unleavened BREAD"
and "TRUTH about Judaism: What's the big deal about Unleavened Bread?"
nanhei 3 years ago
I don't see what kind of bread you use makes any sort of theological difference.
Childinfaith 3 years ago 2
Childinfaith-"I don't see what kind of bread you use makes any sort of theological difference"
It is Catholicism's claim that the bread becomes Christ's body; in that sense it should be of utmost importance because Christ was "pierced" and by His "stripes" we are healed. Matzah is striped and pierced; the Communion wafer is not.
nanhei 2 years ago
The importance is the substance of it becoming Christ's body, not what it looks like. The Eastern rite and Orthodox Church use leavened square pieces of bread dipped in the wine. It makes absolutly no difference to what happens to the bread. Simply because it doesn't have a cute little design of stripes and piecings doesn't make it any less Christ's body. What you are simply doing is making a mountain out of a molehill.
Childinfaith 2 years ago
@OneTrueChurch I agree. I was Catholic for 32 years. I once bought matzos on sale after a Pesach (Passover), and I found them so dry. I suppose one drinks the wine with them to moisten them!
Transubstatiation links Catholicism with Judaism because the Last Supper was a Seder. Easter occurs after a full moon because Pesach is on the 14 Nisan, and it occurs around a full moon. (All Jewish months begin with a new moon.)
BuddyNovinski 1 year ago
We used unleaven bread but our Eastern Catholics used leaven bread.
mannyfit75 2 years ago
mannyfit75-The unleavened bread should be matzahs which is not only unleavened, but striped and pierced. Again, it is Catholicism's claim that it becomes Christ's body - and it was striped and pierced.
nanhei 2 years ago
I like to add St. Ignatius words as well. He was taught by St. John the Apostle.
They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."
"Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.
mannyfit75 3 years ago
answer me this is the consicration of the thanksgiving, i mean the eucharist a miracle?
shanana000 3 years ago
Yes, it is! Many of the miracles that God performs, in Scripture, are prefigurements of the Eucharist. For example:
When God, through Moses, turns water into blood (Exodus 7:14-24).
When God turns water into wine (John 2:1-10).
When God multiplies the loaves and fishes, feeding five thousand people (Matthew 14:14-20).
God bless you and keep you,
Anthony
seltian 3 years ago
Great video.
1 thing I should point out. Heresy can only be taught by someone who was once Catholic. Unless christianstudents was Catholic and then left the Church, he can't be a heretic.
God bless you and keep you.
seltian 3 years ago
all religion is rhetoric.
catholicism is a cult.
God is real..religion is just something to make people feel better. There ya go i didnt even have to make a long winded video about it. Dont fear the truth people
Nycewell 4 years ago
what is this some diest nonsence?
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
no just logical thinking...
and its spelled deist
Nycewell 4 years ago
Jesus is the TRUTH and he established the Catholic Church Nycewell.
cavsterv 3 years ago
God bless you...
hankpin 4 years ago
Well done. Keep it up. Don't forget to pray for these guys.
pbaylis1 4 years ago
onetruechurch you are a great person may god bless you on your journey and you know your church history
gm1600 4 years ago
Thank you and God bless you as well
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
good video and good explaintion
SexiiGerMexii 4 years ago
thanks
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
Bottom line and only question that matters is this and every believer of Christ should be-
If you died tonight and God said to you: Why should I let you enter through my gates,what would your responses be?Just curious.
Hiswillnotmine1 4 years ago
1) such a senario will not happen. God's judgement is not decided based on the persons answer to a set of questions.
2) my answer would be: Bedcause your son died for my sins, and i did what your son told me to do.
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
Very true and well put.
juggles20007 4 years ago
Sadly but true,I've had Catholics call me a "Jesus Freak" saying I talk too much about Him and that there are other things in life besides Him,while others have said:The Bible was written by man so you can't go by everything you read." Imagine that!This is coming out of the mouths of His "chosen" church???
Hiswillnotmine1 4 years ago
there are many people claiming to be catholic that arn't truly catholic. Besides, being born into a catholic family doesn't automatically put you in good standing with the church, one must follow all that the church has taught.
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
Following Jesus is not a laundry list of "things" or rituals that you have to check off in order to be saved! This would make His love conditional and something to "earn",but then again you believe that He only loves and will save only those Catholic,while other Christians are doomed.I have seen more faith and obedience in many Christians who are not of this denomination as well,so what will their outcome be?
Hiswillnotmine1 4 years ago
beleiving in jesus means believing and following all that he has commanded us. all of the "things" and "rituals" which the catholic church follows have been given to us by christ for the salvation of souls.
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
Those are lapsed catholics.
juggles20007 4 years ago
Dont u think that Jesus wud have said ti the apostles''i dont really mean that this bread is my body it only symbolises it!!'' at the last supper??He didnt for a simple reason!He really meant that the bread will become his flesh and the wine his blood!!The Church called this Transtubstanciation!!(spelled wrong i think??)Its a mircle!!We will never fully understand it but it happens everytime a priest says a mass!!!
IrishCatholic7 4 years ago
Yes He said "this is my body" Not "I just changed this piece of bread to contain my presence" Or "I just changed the substance of this piece of bread into a piece of my body" He was clearly using it as a way to remember Him being broken for us and His Blood spilled.
christianstudents 4 years ago
history testifies that when jesus said "this is my body" and "this is my blood" that the bread and wine were changed into the substance of his body and blood. this is the teaching of ALL the anchient fathers. The symbolic eucharist teaching is less then 500 years old! BTW, where in the bible does it say anything about a symbolic eucharist? It doesn't.
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
History ? what History book does that?
Yes and Paul said there were Heretivs "in" the early church. Just because it was around during the begining of the CHurch does not make it valid. There is a reason why we say "show me in the Bible"
christianstudents 4 years ago
ok christianstudents can you "show me in the bible" where it says that all christian beliefs must be in the bible? Can you "show me in the bible" where it says that God's word has only been given to us in the written form? Can you "show me in the bible" where its says that scripture ALONE is our final authority? Can you "show me in the bible" where it says that the eucharist is only a symbol?
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
When not in line with God's Word,it is easy to see how people go astray and believe in false teachers and doctrines. If you get a chance,please take a look at Jose Luis De Jesus on Youtube and see just what happens when people aren't given the Truth from their leaders-they become open to "wolves". And yet people will say Scriptures aren't as important as Church doctrine? The Scriptures will save lives!
Hiswillnotmine1 4 years ago
i never said that that scriptures are less important than churc h doctrine. As far as I'm concerned, scripture and tradition are two sides to the same coin. In fact if it wasn't for church tradition, you wouldn't have the new testament that we hold dear.
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
True, there were heretics in the early Church. But there were also real Christians in the early Church. If the Real Presence/Transubstantiation were heresy, there would be people in the early Church who did not beleive in it.
Yet this is not so. All of the early Church Fathers beleived in the Real Presence.
The only people in the early Church who didn't beleive in the Real Presence were people like the Gnostics and Docetists, who taught that matter is evil!
seltian 3 years ago
nope, those miracles in the old test actually happen..your eucharist stays a wafer and wine...no actual change..so no comparison.
shanana000 3 years ago
No, the Eucharist does not remain a wafer and wine. It APPEARS to be a wafer and wine, but, in fact, it is the Body and Blood of Christ.
In the words of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, "[T]he seeming bread is not bread, though sensible to taste, but the Body of Christ; and that the seeming wine is not wine, though the taste will have it so, but the Blood of Christ."
And the miracles in the New Testament also happened.
seltian 3 years ago
Nevertheless, the Real Presence is clearly taught in the Bible. I will give you some verses if you want.
God bless you and keep you,
Anthony
seltian 3 years ago
Christianstudents:
You have spoken well.We partake of communion in the Non-denominational churches as well,but to "remember Him" as HE HIMSELF said,not to literally eat and drink Him. Jesus said He would not return until His appointed time by the Father(The Rapture),it doesn't say "except to become present in the bread of the Catholic church on Sundays." He meant what He said concerning WHEN He'd return and He will not leave His place until then!
Hiswillnotmine1 4 years ago
you are making a false dicotomy between the rememberance of christ and his real presence. its not "either or" its "both and".
yes jesus is going to come again but this doesn't mean he cannot also be with us in the lord's supper. BTW, the rapture is nowhere mentioned in scripture, so if you are going to critisize catholic teaching as being "unscriptural" then you should also critisize your own teaching.
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
Anyhow,concerning what is and is not in talking about The Rapture and Purgatory,the 2 are Apples and Oranges. The Bible speaks of HOW Jesus will return (Also look at the defintion of the word Rapture),but the Bible doesn't even give a reference to a 3rd place or a "holding cell" the church calls Purgatory.
Hiswillnotmine1 4 years ago
yes it does. in 1 corinthians 3:15 it talks about a person on the day of judgement having to pass though fire and recieving loss for the bad works which tey have done. this is purgatory.
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
That scripture in no way indicates a purgatory. Jesus said we would know falsehood by its fruits. I implore you to examine the fruits of roman catholicism and the vatican. Also The pope himself said that Muslims, Buddhist etc are all praying to same God. We know that is false. If you believe that then please disregard my comment as it would be of no use to you.
Pormilous 4 years ago
Yes lets examine the fruits of the Catholic Church...
The Bible...
need I say more?
HornPlayer983 4 years ago
Amen Hornplayer983!
Check out my videos for the real fruit of catholicism.
Onechosenvessel 4 years ago
christianstudents, do u always twist doctrine to support your heretic beliefs. The symbolic eucharist has only been celebrated for about 200 years. Even martin Luther didn't believe in just a symbolic eucharist!
Renton405 4 years ago
"He was clearly using it as a way to remember Him being broken for us and His Blood spilled." That does not fit...,if it was so clear why did "The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?'" (John 6:51--52).
Why didn't Jesus "clarify" this to the crowd. If it was understood only as a symbol why would the Crowd turn away?
nudocus 4 years ago
Christianstudent why do u continue to argue with what the Church Fathers have taught!!I suppose u dont believe in Mary or Purgatory either????
IrishCatholic7 4 years ago
"And do not call ANYONE on earth 'father',for you have ONE Father,and He is in heaven." (Matthew 23:9)
I guess this was just written only for us non-Catholic "heathens" and the Catholics are the exception here right? or maybe He just forgot to add that "missing" part in there??? Give me a break!!!
Hiswillnotmine1 4 years ago
Sorry i meant good video!!!I learened now what to say to our Protestant Brothers and sisters!!!!
IrishCatholic7 4 years ago
good video. YouTube Catholics Unite!
tizzidale 4 years ago
"it is no longer bread an wine, it's in disguise"
I will continue to pray that God opens your eyes.
christianstudents 4 years ago
Jesus, at the Last Supper, said "This IS my body. This IS my blood." These ARE His words; not ours.
TheCatholicGuy 4 years ago
christianstudents, i showed you how the early church fathers believed the same thing about the eucharist. Why do you constantly go against what the ancient fathers said
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
give me a break. I said "in disguise" so that you might be able to understand what happens durring the consecration. Can you attept to refute anything I said?
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago
That is your retort?
You mock a belief held by the Apostles, their disciples, and is older than any Protestant church and that is all you offer as a reply.
Pretty weak dude.
mikethetiger 4 years ago
Excellent video! A great profession of faith!
TheCatholicGuy 4 years ago
thanks, God Bless you
OneTrueChurch 4 years ago