@medusa210562 This doctrine of consubstantiation or whatever is a complete man-made innovation. Prove that such a teaching ever existed before the 11th century. Of course if you "have to use history" then you'll go against your beliefs, because your beliefs were made up in the 16th century, just like Mormon beliefs were made up in the 19th century. If they 'had to use history', they'd fall at the same obstacle as you. Where is your honesty? You think Protestants didn't kill Catholics?
@nepistepa I'm sorry, man, but I'm not talking to you anymore. I'm shaking the dust off my feet. You're a bigot, imagining that Protestants are nice people and Catholics are bad.
@medusa210562 You are the epitome of living in denial. I asked you to prove your church is 2000 years old, you mention the Waldesians who believed in the Real Presence & penance! I'll pray for you, your bigoted attitude to Catholics, your credulity but most of all your lack of intellectual honesty. As I said, you might fool yourself, might even fool others & try to fool me, but you can't fool God who sees right through you into your motivations for wanting to believe lies. You're brainwashed.
@nepistepa The church was always there. It was not popes but everyone the popes scared. It wasn't necessarily an organized church, because it was oppressed. It was make of millions that were killed by the Papacy during the dark ages.
@medusa210562 The 15th century Waldesian poem "Noble Lesson" says, "To make our confession sincerely, without any defect, & to do penance during the present life ... indeed, through these things the soul finds salvation."The Waldesian confession of faith of 1508AD professed belief in the priesthood, all 7 sacraments of the Catholic Church, including infant baptism, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and priestly absolution from sin. These are doctrines of the 2nd & 3rd century Church.
@nepistepa I don't recall the Waldensian trying to kill the papacy, I recall the ather way rould, What about the dogma "you shall not kill" their were practically catholics who wanted to spread the bible AND YOU POEPLE STILL KILLED THEM, YOU STILL KILLED THEM, IMMAGINE IF THEY HAD BELIEVED MORE BIBLICAL DOCTRINES, YOU WOULD HAVE PURGED THEM WITH FIRE.
@medusa210562 I'm sorry, man, but, at this point, I'm going to have to sign off. I can hear Wisdom cry in the marketplace to her playmates. Or else it's Big Ben in London singing a song about you, going, "Brainwashed brainwaaaashed, brainwashed brainwaaaashed." Who has taught you to put your faith in ahistorical nonsense and man-made fairytales of a 2000 year old sola scriptura church that never existed? Have you no self-critical faculty? Can't you question what you've been told?
@medusa210562 Here you go again, "Catholics kill people, Protestants don't". What a pile of absolute nonsense. You really need to take a look at your flagrant bigotry. What did Protestant Elizabeth I of England do to Catholics? What did Protestant Oliver Cromwell do to Catholics? What did the Protestant English do to the Catholic Irish? Brainwashed, brainwaaaaashed. You're no better than a bigot, educated in historical fantasies. As I've said, no self-critical faculty.
@nepistepa Hang on a moment protestants are sinners like me. The pope is the infallible one who coherence kings to make laws to squash heretics for about 1300 years.
Jesus Christ is crucified mystically in the Catholic Mass. Jesus is TRUE BODY AND BLOOD during the consecration of the mass. This is not merely a symbol but TRUE FLESH AND BLOOD! Over time people have not believed in the consecration. There are countless scientific proofs- read "Miracles of the Eucharist" found around the world. Read the life of Gemma Galgani, she will bring everyone close to God. Jesus is so sadden of people not believing in his presence in the Eucharist. PRAY to see the truth
THE BREAD which I shall give for the life of the world IS MY FLESH. He who is UNITED TO THE LORD becomes ONE SPIRIT WITH HIM. Unless you eat the FLESH of the Son of man and DRINK HIS BLOOD, you have no life in you. Take: this is my BODY .. This is my BLOOD. Because there is ONE BREAD, we who are many are ONE BODY, for we all partake of the ONE BREAD. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of PROFANING THE BODY AND BLOOD of the Lord.
If the Church herself is the Mystical Body of Christ, then the following words of St Paul on the matter are extremely significant. "The Bread which we break, is it not a participation in the Body of Christ? Because there is one Bread, we who are many are one Body, for we all partake of the one Bread." St Paul sees 'one Bread' as a uniting factor in the one Body of which Christ is the head. How can an ordinary loaf cause incorporation into Christ's Mystical Body, which involves union with Christ?
@Nicklas07 scripture is full of people called father - "our father Abraham" (google call no man father) and what did you call that guy your mother was married to? Just sayin'.
@sue200012 Point well made Sue, however the statement made by Yeshua ha Mashiach (aka Jesus The Christ) was brand spanking new at the time. The Pharisees & Sadducees considered Yeshua a blasphemer, a heretic, a demon, so even if they DID hear him say that about calling anyone Father, I doubt they would drop the way they addressed any male kin, don't you think? Anyway, I taught all my children to call me Dad, or Daddy, or by my first name, but that their Father is my Father too. Peace
His flesh is true food. Transubstantiation is not true, there is no more need of an alter and sacrifices, read hebrew. The catholic church still practices sacrifices on an alter. Jesus flesh is true food. It heals me it saves me. think about it the bread became flash but I don't exept his true flesh I am lost. But if the bread doesn't become flesh. I accept his flesh. Transubstantiation is catholic magic. Cathekism is nice philosophy it can be made to sound nice but it is not biblical.
@medusa210562 If it's not true, why didn't Jesus say "this is bread and wine", eat and drink it in remembrance of me. He didn't, He said this is my body, my blood. Being biblical" doesn't answer all questions. (OBTW, the Catholic church gave the world the bible.) There are also traditions Paul said to hold fast to.
@sue200012 Mark 7:8 "you have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions." there are traditions of man. how do we know the difference? Atcs 17:10 gives you the answer. The catholic church didn't give us the bible, it stopped the average person from reading it for hundreds of years. the Waldensian and many like them died for this reason. I ACCEPT THE BODY AND THE BLOOD OF CHRIST FOR MY SALVATION. IN REMEMBRANCE, IN REMEMBRANCE OF WHAT HAPPENED AT CALVARY.
@medusa210562 How can we profane the "body and blood of the Lord" by eating of an ordinary loaf or drinking ordinary wine? "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. ..For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself." Profaning an ordinary loaf, no matter how blessed, cannot be equated with profaning the "body and blood of the Lord".
@medusa210562 We are 'one body', 'the body of Christ', not because we eat of an ordinary 'fleshly' (material) loaf but of spiritual bread from heaven spoken of in Capernaum. "It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail." Likewise, St Paul does not describe ordinary 'fleshly' (material) bread but the Bread of Life, which is the very flesh of our Lord's spiritual, resurrected body, and He says clearly "..THE BREAD which I shall give for the life of the world IS MY FLESH."
@medusa210562 Jesus does NOT say that the BREAD OF LIFE is his WORD or his SPIRIT or FAITH in him; no, he says that the BREAD OF LIFE IS his very FLESH (and, we deduce, also his very blood). 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 you; he who EATS MY FLESH and DRINKS MY BLOOD has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is FOOD INDEED, and my blood is DRINK INDEED."
@nepistepa "we are one body" is that literal too. literal in a physical sense? NO. I accept His Body and His blood but not transubstantiation. 5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. We eat spiritual bread from heaven, Not transubstantiation, the bread people eat at mass is only a physical bread, but they can accept the body of Christ in their heart,( in memory)
@medusa210562 When you say that, "Jesus does NOT say that the BREAD OF LIFE is his WORD or his SPIRIT or FAITH in him or the Eucharist, he says that the BREAD OF LIFE IS his very FLESH," you quote me, adding "or the Eucharist". The Eucharist is a rite, not his BODY and BLOOD. In Matt, our Lord says, "This is my BODY ..." and these are the words used in the rite. Is His FLESH not part of His BODY? How ridiculous.
@medusa210562 You say, "We eat spiritual bread from heaven ..." And what is that spiritual bread from heaven? The Counsellor SPIRIT of the Son? In the Eucharist, the Church EATS the BREAD OF LIFE, the FLESH of CHRIST and has life within Her.
@nepistepa trambsustatiation in not in the bible. Jesus says He is the light of the world, He is the truth. He is the good Shepperd. He is our food. All of this we accept by faith. He did say " eat of my body and drink of by blood" but you cannot do this physically, and it is not necessary for you to do this physically. This is sinful doctrine.
@medusa210562 Yes, transubstantiation is not mentioned in the Bible, but neither are blood circulation or the Trinity, so the absence of explicit reference to any of these are hardly argument against them.
@nepistepa Jesus does NOT say that the BREAD OF LIFE is his WORD or his SPIRIT or FAITH in him or the Eucharist, he says that the BREAD OF LIFE IS his very FLESH
@medusa210562 Obviously, we people in the Church do not all share the same physical body but we are all joined to Christ. 1 Cor 6:15-17 "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I therefore take the members of Christ & make them members of a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, "The two shall become one flesh. But he who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him."
@medusa210562 How does Christ's Mystical Body exist with Its Head? Through our spirits being one Spirit with each other and with Christ. Eph 2:19-21 "you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together" "Unless you EAT THE FLESH of the Son of man and DRINK HIS BLOOD", this condition of being one in Christ is unachievable.
@medusa210562 1 Cor 15 "The last Adam [Jesus] became a life-giving Spirit ... flesh & blood can't inherit the kingdom of God nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable." Yes, the BREAD OF LIFE is His very FLESH so if we are to become one SPIRIT with Him, we must listen to Him. "This is my BODY ... this is my BLOOD ..unless you EAT THE FLESH of the Son of Man and DRINK HIS BLOOD [not merely receive GRACE/have FAITH/receive His SPIRIT, although these are necessary] you have not LIFE in you."
@nepistepa I eat His body I partake of His broken body which heals me, and I drink of His Blood which gives me life. Transubstantiation comes form the devil. By the way many protestant martyrs died because they believed what I believe. The catholic church burned them at the stake CATHOLIC MAGIC, HAVE A GOOD DAY
@medusa210562 And how does ordinary bread and wine 'heal you' and 'give you life'? How can one be ένοχος (liable to, answerable to, guilty of sin against) ordinary bread? Or μη διακρίνων (not recognising, not discerning) ordinary wine? If the Jews were "baptised into Moses" and "ate the same spiritual food" and "drank from the spiritual rock", which were real food & drink, so much more does the Church. It is the BREAD OF LIFE, His FLESH, food indeed, His BLOOD, drink indeed, which heals.
@medusa210562 Only 65 years or so after the crucifixion, St Ignatius wrote, "They withhold themselves from Eucharist ..because they confess not that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which flesh suffered for our sins, and which in His loving-kindness the Father raised up." The Father didn't send us an authoritative book but a living man & the Son of Man didn't write a qur'an but gave his authority to His living Church, which has written, interpreted and canonised scripture.
@nepistepa St ignatius was not a bible writes just like me and you. So please don't quote such people with a protestant like me.
Now the bread and the wine don't heal me but the real bread and the real wine do. As I partake of the holy supper, in memory, Transubstantiation is from magic, like all the catholic sacraments, Magic, Can transubstantiation give salvation to a catholic who partakes but doesn't believe in hi her heart?
@medusa210562 You write, "Can transubstantiation give salvation to a Catholic who partakes but doesn't believe in hi her heart?" And you claim to "know the bible"! Read 1 Cor 11:27-29 "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself ... For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself."
@nepistepa 1 Cor 11:27-29 "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself ... For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself." That counts for me, not just for Catholics REGARDLESS OF THE FALSE THE TRANSUBSTANTIATION BELIEF
@medusa210562 How can you "drink judgment upon" yourself by eating ordinary bread? The bread is the Bread of Life, the very Flesh of Jesus Christ. 1 Cor 10:16-17 "The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread." How can partaking of ordinary bread possibly join the members of the Mystical Body of Christ together and create one Church? No, we eat the one Bread of Life.
@nepistepa I don't partake of ordinary bread, But the bread I eat is just physically bread.
But I a protestant who does not believe in transubstantiation, eat the bread and drink the wine that represents the body and the blood of Christ. So doing I truly partake of His broken body and shead blood. And I am judged as to how I do this in my heart. As were the Judas (not honestly) and the other 11 (humbly}
@medusa210562 You write, "transubstantiation is from magic". You sound like an atheist. Matt 18:20 "For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them." I suppose that's magic too, then. If you follow their way of thinking, You'll be telling me that prayers for healing are magic spells next. God is not magic, He is commanded by no one.
@medusa210562 Are St John the Apostle & Polycarp two of the "wolves St Paul foretold? Come off it. Is St Ignatius, bishop of Antioch (of all places), also a pupil of John and martyred for the faith, was one of such "wolves"? This is laughable. You seem to think the guidance of the Holy Spirit was withdrawn from the Body of Christ immediately upon the death of St John. If that's what your individualistic assessment of Church history is, I can only say, "Look where Protestantism leaves people."
@medusa210562 St John, St Polycarp and St Ignatius were all alive and active in the main Christian centres at the same time. Polycarp and Ignatius were taught the gospel by St John. St Ignatius is holy and blessed martyr for the gospel who you treat with a contempt that surely only speaks of ignorance. It is written that St Peter himself appointed Ignatius as bishop of Antioch. The Church of Antioch was a well-established stronghold of the gospel and firmly ground in apostolic teaching.
@medusa210562 The Docetists taught that when St John wrote, "the word became flesh," he was speaking figuratively. St Ignatius maintains true apostolic teaching on the flesh of Christ & even offered his own flesh in holy martyrdom. Like you, the Docetists denied that the Eucharistic elements were the flesh & blood of Christ. Who are you? Did you sit at the feet of St John & hear the gospel from his lips? Do you really believe that you know what John's words meant better than Ignatius, his pupil?
@nepistepa the word became flesh is not figuratively, The word was with God and the word became flash. The word became Jesus. John 1 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. Acts 10:17 You see no man is required to accept another man doctrine without using his own intelligence.
@medusa210562 You write, "no man is required to accept another man doctrine without using his own intelligence." The Holy Spirit, however, operates differently. Your thinking must be shaped into the consensus of the Church. Individual Protestants all using their own independent intelligence just produces schism and disunity.
@medusa210562 The early apostolic Church which was thrown out of the synagogues and persecuted by pagans in the first centuries AD believed that they ate the Flesh of Christ in the Eucharist. St Ignatius, the pupil of St John, was one such martyr (the word means 'witness') persecuted for the apostolic faith. They defend the apostolic teaching against many heresies, including docetism & gnosticism. When do you say God removed His Spirit from these martyrs who ate the Flesh of Christ?
@medusa210562 The New Testament that you give such authority to is a product of the Church. It was the Church who decided which books would go into it and which books would be declared heretical. This was done under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The contents of the New Testament canon were finalised in the 5th century. The doctrine of the Trinity was only finalised under the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the 4th century. Do you think that you have the Holy Spirit and these men did not?
@nepistepa The church is not the catholic church, is made of man that belong to the catholic church and other church. For example many heretics burned at the stake by the pope were part of the real church. Giordano bruni was part of the real church. Some man of God put the bible together, doesn't matter if they were catholic or not to me. THEN UNFORTUNATELY PEOPLE WERE FORBIDDEN TO READ IT FOR A LONG TIME THAT WAS THE DEVILS DOING THROUGH THE CHURCH OF ROME.
@medusa210562 These men gave you the Bible under God's guidance & the interpretation of the Holy Spirit. You need to refer to them for that spiritual guidance & interpretation of scripture. The Bible receives its authority from the Church. The Church received its authority not from the Bible but from Christ & the apostles. Matt 16:18 "I will build my church & the powers of Hades shall not prevail against it." The Bible is not "the pilllar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15), it is the Church.
@medusa210562 You write, "the church in 1tim 3 is the church of God not the catholic church." The word "catholic" means "according to the whole", ie, not schismatic religion but united in spirit, united in teaching. The Church of the ecumenical councils which interpreted/canonised scripture & taught the Trinity AND that the Church eats the FLESH of Christ in the Eucharist, its teaching is preserved only in Catholic Orthodox teaching, not in thousands of schismatic Protestant sects.
@nepistepa I believe in the trinity and I believe when I am gathered with other Christians, God is there. And I believe I eat His body and drink His blood. Truly for my spiritual well being. I don't eat His Body and drink His blood, for my physical well being.
THEREFORE YOU CAN KEEP ON PRACTICING CATHOLIC MAGIC, I DON'T NEED TRANSUBSTANTIATION TO PARTAKE OF HIS BODY AND BLOOD, FOR THE HEALING OF MY SOUL . There is not biblical support for it.
@medusa210562 It's good that you believe in the Trinity. This is the teaching of the pupils of St John. It is not good that you follow the docetists who don't believe in eating the Flesh of Christ in the Eucharist, against the teaching of the pupils of St John. The Church has followed this teaching ever since the beginning under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Until the Reformation, for 1400 years, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, she followed this teaching, received from John.
@nepistepa I don't believe in transubstantiation it is only fabricated, The bread and the wine symbolism only. The literal part is that we eat the true body and drink the true blood spiritually. You can say in a thousand ways but you are only make interpretation.
@medusa210562 "You can say in a thousand ways but you are only make interpretation." But the point that you are ignoring is which interpretation of the gospel of John is of the Holy Spirit - the Church's or yours? And how does someone approaching belief in Christ discern whether or not the pupils of St John had the Holy Spirit when believing they ate the Flesh of Christ in the Eucharist?
@nepistepa John didn't believe how you do, He believed how I do. The question about approacing belief is very important here, for protestant is equal to everyone, for catholic is not sola scriptura, so you can say what you want, because you can go out of the scripture at the end of it all, and say what you want.
@medusa210562 It's all very well to criticise uneducated people, that doesn't invalidate the science they should know. There is nothing wrong with statues, only worshipping them as gods. One cannot "say what you want" if one is formed and guided by apostolic teaching, which has been built up stone upon stone. You write, "the Church as always been unitety". So who was in the united Church in the 2nd to 5th centuries then? I'll be fascinated by your Protestant answer.
@nepistepa The catholic church took away the part about "you shall not make statues" the best defense you have against what I am saying is that it is still there in the catholic bible. BUT LOOK AT THE DAMAGE THIS HAS CAUSED, BOOK AND BOOKS COULD BE WRITTEN ABOUT IT. I used to live in Italy, I used to play the clarinet behind the processions of saints. NOTHING SHORT OF PAGANISM. it's wrong to bow to a statue of a saint, called it veneration, or what you like, Exodus 20:4
@medusa210562 Why will I be fascinated by your answer to which historical figures were in the united Church in the 2nd & 3rd centuries then? Because, after you've excluded all the heretics who deny Christ's divinity or humanity, you'll be left with people who believed in eating the Flesh of the risen Christ in the Eucharist, having bishops, baptising children, the intercession of the saints, public & private confession, penance. Who was in your 'always united' Church then?
@medusa210562 You write, "The true Christians in the second and third centuries were few just like now. That is not what I asked. I asked who they were. Name them if they existed as you claim they do. If you can't name such people (as there is no historical record of such people), then such a tradition of a 2nd & 3rd united Protestant church is only a MAN-MADE TRADITION invented to support a 4 centuries old Protestant tradition, a historical lie, an affront to the educated.
@medusa210562 You write, "The literal part is that we eat the true body and drink the true blood spiritually." How can you LITERALLY EAT Christ's Flesh SPIRITUALLY without believing that you are eating His FLESH? Christ has a resurrected BODY, he is not merely a resurrected SPIRIT. Don't you believe in the resurrection of the BODY? Oh, I forgot, you probably don't believe the Holy Spirit was in the Church which created the Nicene creed which teaches the resurrection of the body ...
@nepistepa Jesus says that we he will partake again of this supper when he returns and we are in heavel toghether, Well them we will still do this in memory of the immense sacrifice Jesus suffered on the cross, but not for the remission of our sins. It is always "in memory" "do this in memory of me" We eat physical bread physically, and we eat His broken body spiritually, all at the same time. Transubstantiation is a human invention, and sinful.
@medusa210562 You write, "You don't know the church. The church was the heretics burned at the stake." Protestants burned heretics at the stake. Perhaps you don't know Protestantism. You certainly seem to ignore Protestant sins at the expense of Catholics.
@medusa210562 Your "make your own mind up" approach, which promotes schism and requires no consensus, is modern individualism, pure and simple. It just promotes the creation of all kind of individualist interpretations & so-called "revelations" like those of Mormonism & the Jehovah Witness. Catholic Orthodox teaching is ancient & established and, with regard to the Eucharist, as old as St John and his pupils. Catholics martyrs, killed by pagans, Protestants and atheists, have witnessed to this.
@nepistepa People must be allowed to make their mind up. True ecumenism is to let the people study the scripture for themselves, ecumenism as the catholic church teaches it, is something that will end as a pope as a dictator. Don't you remember Galileo was scared to say what he believed about the planets. And don't you remember even during Mussolini in Italy some protestant were in Jail for not agreeying with the catholic church. Only 70 year ago.
@medusa210562 You write, "People must be allowed to make their mind up". Yes, but they must also allow it to be FORMED & GUIDED by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit creates consensus, not thousands of sects all disagreeing with other. Such disagreement is a sign of mere human individualism, not the unifying Spirit of Christ. Mussoline was a fascist, hardly an example of Catholic teaching in practice. You'll be presenting forward Hitler as an example Catholic next.
@nepistepa FORMED & GUIDED by the Holy Spirit. Millions of Catholics don't know what the catholic church believes, you are happy with that. You only use your energy to bring protestants to the catholic church. when no one had the bible and Catholics followed the pope blindly the Vatican was happy, no division only one church HOW NICE.
@medusa210562 You write accusing me of believing in Catholics not being FORMED & GUIDED, You need to read my messages with a little more mental acumen.
@nepistepa About catholics being formed and guided, that is not what I said. What I am saying is YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO TELL ME, Good. But millions of catholics don't even know what the catholic church believes. I know I am Italian. That say it all.
@medusa210562 Only a Protestant could suggest that unity of basic Church teaching could ever be achieved by the Holy Spirit letting everybody have their own opinions! Look at the reality! Look at history! The history of Protestantism is just a history of the multiplication of sects and disunity which only worsens as time goes by. Wake up! It is the Catholic Orthodox who hold the spirit-filled teachings of the first five centuries.
@nepistepa The history of protestantism is not good. But the only other option history revels is the dictatorial dark ages where heretics were killed. The waldensian. Giordano bruni. Millions were killed because they did not agree with the catholic church. there is one true church and is made of people of all denominations who truly love Jesus Christ.
@medusa210562 You write, "the only other option history revels is the dictatorial dark ages where heretics were killed." This is not realistic. ALL modern Christians are well aware of the dark parts of Christian history where their own behaviour, both CATHOLIC and PROTESTANT contradicts the gospel in such an evil way. Which modern Christian group either advocates killing people for heresy or practices it? Again, you mention the heretic Giordano Bruno, who denied Christ.
@medusa210562 You write, "Giordano bruno didn't kill anyone. The church killed him. Can you not see" St John Ogilvie didn't kill anyojne. Can you not see?
@nepistepa there was always some people that wanted to contradict the catholic church and were afraid. Didn't they kill some of Luther's friends. I don't agree with any catholic believes even the trinity or other doctrines that seam to be similar to mine, are not exactly the same when studied carefully, I was a catholic. My grandmother used to self flagellate. And go allover Italy visiting the statues of saints that manifested supernatural phenomena. I have seen the dark ages.
@medusa210562 You write, "I don't agree with any catholic believes even the trinity or other doctrines that seam to be similar to mine, are not exactly the same when studied carefully" Well, if you don't believe the Trinity as taught in Catholic Orthodoxy, then you are out of line even with mainstream Protestantism & even mainstream Protestant evangelicalism. So much for the unity of the Holy Spirit in your case.
@medusa210562 I'm sorry that your mother disagrees with Doctor of the Church St Therese of Lisieux and self-flagellates. As for whether any such statues are evidence of miracles, I'll leave that to her credulity. Authoritative Church teaching & practice are mandated for Catholics. Catholics are not required to believe in any given putatively miraculous statue.
@nepistepa I grew up in Italy there a thousands of miraculous statues, that is the consequence of taking away the second commandment, the one found in exodus 20. Please don't talk to me about the numbering of the commandments according to Catholics protestants and Jewish. I only believe in exodus 20
@medusa210562 So come one, exactly when was the unity of the Holy Spirit withdrawn from the Church? First century? Was it the early martyrs such as St Ignatius, the pupil of St John and 3rd bishop of Antioch who went astray? Second century? Was it those such as Irenaeus who is first known to regard all gospels as uninspired except the current canonical gospels? Third century? Was it the likes of the martyr Pope Stephen I who stood up against baptising people twice? The Fourth century?
@nepistepa the church as always been unitety, but not in fear of the Papacy, The church is made of followers of Christ, not Catholics. The Holy spirit has always been with them. The catholic church is just a religious political power, with the emphasis on power.
@medusa210562 Provide evidence of your 'sola scriptura' 'united church' ever existing in the 2nd or 3rd century. You believe in an unscriptural transmission of authority & spiritual power to a BOOK. Christianity is not Islam. We do not give the Bible the same authority that Muslims give the Qur'an. God sent us not a book but His Son who built his Church, not wrote a book. Books are subject to divisive individual interpretation. Church is guided by Spirit. The letter kills, the Spirit gives life.
@nepistepa If it wasn't for the bible I would be a flagellating catholic,I would pay money to the priest to help my grandfather live purgatory earlier.I would bow to Mary and the saints. As if they were not created and forgiven like me.I would wonder if it is wrong to be intimate with my wife.I would follow and fear man instead of God.I would confess my sins to another man without having done nothing wrong against such man.I would believe in magical sacraments like baptism of infants.
@medusa210562 You write, "..I would pay money to the priest to help my grandfather live purgatory earlier." Catholics do not pay to get people out of purgatory. They make offerings to God. Catholics & Protestants do this every Sunday, at baptisms, weddings and funerals. 1 Cor 9:13-14 "..Those who are employed in the temple service ..share in the sacrificial offerings.. In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel."
@medusa210562 You write, "I would bow to Mary and the saints." Bowing, curtseying or lowering the head are signs of respect and assent, common throughout the world. They do not constitute worship. 1 Peter 2:17 says, "Honour all men." We should certainly therefore honour blessed Mary and the saints of God.
@medusa210562 I have to chortle at you Protestants who believe your Church with its Protestant beliefs has always existed, even in the first three centuries AD, despite having no evidence that can show that such a group of people united in such beliefs existed at that period. Your Protestantism is not even 400 years old, a "sola fide" child of Luther, the progenitor of THOUSANDS of disunitied sects. Such a phenomenon can be judged from its all too evident fruit.
@medusa210562 The division and multiplication of heresy, where the individual is raised over community, or community raised over the individual, where spirit-guided consensus is eventually whittled away into fragmented community, this is exactly the opposite of the workings of the Spirit. Catholicism has the magisterium against which any Catholic can be measured. What do Protestant sects have? THEIR OWN PERSONAL VIEW ON MATTERS.
@medusa210562 So, if a couple of Protestants want to create their own literal sect and lead others astray, because they interpret the Bible as showing that the Son as being inferior to the Father, what can dissuade them if they refuse to recognise the unity of the Body of Christ under the guidance of the Holy Spirit? If they want to believe that the word "flesh" is only figurative with regard to Christ's earthly body, what can dissuade them? Jesus did not plan such an individualistic religion.
@medusa210562 Jesus created a Body, a Church, which is united to Him, Spirit AND Flesh. He gave the leaders of this Church his authority. This is the Biblical model. There is no other model of authority present in scripture. If you truly believe in the scripture, then you can see that the (only 400 years old) tradition of Jesus' authority being given to scripture is a MAN MADE tradition & NOT SCRIPTURAL. You are deceived if you think 'sola scriptura' authority is scriptural & Jesus' intention.
@medusa210562 "In like manner these men in their dreamings ..REJECT AUTHORITY ..but you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; they said to you, "In the last time there will be SCOFFERS, following their own ungodly passions." It is these who SET UP DIVISIONS, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit. But you, beloved, build yourselves up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit ..and convince some, who doubt" St Jude on authority.
@medusa210562 Jude on those who reject authority - "These are grumblers, malcontents, following their own passions, loud-mouthed boasters, flattering people to gain advantage." Hebrews 13:17 "Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account." 2 Peter 2:9-10 "the Lord knows how ..to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who ...despise authority."
@nepistepa you are the one who rejects my authority, that cames to me from God. To tell you to read the bible and not follow the pope advice or mine in regard to doctrines. you reject my authority. I submit myself to the counsel of saitly man, who don't comand me, but lead me gently in the way of Jesus. You are difendint dictatorship by giving this authority to the catholic church, who wants to burn me at the stake, and ignore my cancience
@medusa210562 You write, "..my authority, that cames to me from God ..you reject my authority." With these words, you are guilty of spiritual pride. You write, "I submit myself to the ..man ..who don't comand me.." The commands are from the Body of Christ, not the man. You write, "..theologians like you.." I am not a trained theologian. You write, "If it wasn't for the bible I would be a flagellating catholic." Only if you had no interest in learning Church teaching about rigorism.
@medusa210562 Perhaps you are just rebelling against the Church because of people who do not follow the teachings of the Church perfectly. That is no excuse for denying the (historically provable!) doctrinally united Church of almost 2 millenia, doctrine perfectly arguable from scripture. Crime being committed does not make law wrong. If you cut yourself from the 2 millenia of organic doctrinal unity for the sake of 400 years of Protestantism sectarian division, you hurt the Church & yourself.
@nepistepa the best catholics are the ignorant once you and the pope don't care much about, ( but care much to change my mind) theologians like you and the bishops are exectly in the predicament of the pharisees, who were in a place of authority but had non
@medusa210562 You write, "..the catholic church.. wants to burn me at the stake.." This last statement, along with your belief in the existence of a 2nd & 3rd century Protestant 'sola fide' united Church, demonstrate such a lack of recognition of reality that I have decided to abandon reasoning with you. You have succumbed to a spiritual pride which leads you into irrational argument, probably an over-reaction to things in your childhood, who knows, but there is no reasoning with such a person.
@medusa210562 I will pray for you. A clear lack of formation in Church teaching has led to rebellion, elevation of the self, spiritual pride, self-assignation of authority, an irrational fear of the Body of Christ, man-made historical fantasies & even denial of present reality. Many Catholics have problems with certain Church teaching but they wouldn't leave God's Holy Church willingly. This is because they recognise the unity of Christ and that Catholics cannot all agree on everything.
@medusa210562 I sense a lack of balance in you. The Catechism, paragraph 1782, says, "Man has the right to act in conscience & in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions." 1792 says, "Ignorance of Christ & his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority & her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct."
@medusa210562 Experience has led you further and further from the teaching of the Church, whereas experience has led me further and further towards the teaching of the Church. You have come to trust in the "power" of the Bible. I see more and more that the Bible can be interpreted to justify horrific behaviour and that only Church teaching & authority stands as a "pillar & bulwark" in rejection of such misinterpretation. I will pray for you and I hope that you will pray for me too.
@medusa210562 By the way, you write, "I submit myself to the counsel of saitly man, who don't comand me, but lead me gently in the way of Jesus." That is not submission, that is assent. If you are to reason correctly, you must differentiate between assent and submission. Submission is obedience to someone's will and desire. Assent is approval of or agreement with someone's viewpoint.
@medusa210562 By the way, you write, "I submit myself to the counsel of saitly man, who don't comand me, but lead me gently in the way of Jesus." That is not submission, that is assent. If you are to reason correctly, you must differentiate between assent and submission. Submission is obedience to someone's will and desire. Assent is approval of or agreement with someone's viewpoint.
@medusa210562 Hebrews 13:17 OBEY your leaders and SUBMIT to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account." 1 Peter 5:6 "Likewise you that are younger BE SUBJECT to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with HUMILITY toward one another, for "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the HUMBLE. Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that in due time he may exalt you." This is scripture, which you teach against.
@medusa210562 Hebrews 13:8-9 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday & today & forever. Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings for it is well that the heart be strengthened by grace.." The Church and Her teaching is one with Christ yesterday & today & forever. Diverse & often strange MAN-MADE 400-year-old Protestant teachings are no benefit as the Bible became the plaything of the individual soul. Luther didn't found a "true" Church 400 years ago, the Church was founded by Jesus Christ.
@nepistepa protestants are 400 years olf because the once before them were burned at the stake. I am an elder at my church, so people submit to me in the real of our theological understanding. No one has to obbey me like a dictator. God bless. My church was started by Jesus 2 thousand year ago.
@medusa210562 You have failed to provide evidence to back up your statement that your church "was started by Jesus 2 thousand year ago". You have not provide evidence for it in the 2nd or 3rd centuries. You are therefore living in a historical cloud-cuckoo land. This does not speak well for your judgement. You also object to scriptural commands to obey and submit to leaders (Heb 13:17) so your pretence to giving the Bible authority is sadly misguided: you oppose it.
@nepistepa I don't really need church History all I need is the bible. But in any case what were the Waldensian to you? tell what were the Waldensian in the north of Italy in your way of thinking? They were church to me. And as you can imagine the papacy was and is the Antichrist. And I can question another human being, protestant or catholic, read acts 17:11
@medusa210562 How ignorance leads to credulity. Listen, even anti-Catholic historians accept that that sect was founded by Peter Waldo in the 12th century. Waldo originally held to Church doctrine and hoped to get Papal approval for his movement. We have his (orthodox) statement of faith from 1180AD which states that "faith without works is dead"! Waldo believed in transubstantiation, prayers for the dead, and infant baptism!
@medusa210562 Your MAN-MADE tradition that a Church has always existed teaching 'sola scriptura' is ahistorical myth which only the ignorant or credulous believe in. 'Sola scriptura' is an invention of Luther. The Biblical model of transmission of teaching authority is by the laying on of hands within an orthodox Church. There is no other Biblical model. The doctrine you teach is MAN-MADE and opposes Biblical teaching.
@medusa210562 Acts 17:11 isn't about CHRISTIANS A checking the Scriptures to see if CHRISTIANS B are QUOTING them properly AND INTERPRETING them according to how THEY, CHRISTIANS A, already interpret them. It's about JEWS checking the Scriptures ONLY to see if St Paul, the CHRISTIAN is QUOTING them properly AND NOT to see if Paul INTERPRETS them according to how THEY, JEWS already interpret them. Sheesh. The Berean Jews were OPEN to an interpretation different from their own.
@nepistepa Jews or not no man is above the scripture,"If anyone does not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn." isaiah 8"20 The rejection of sola cripture by the catholic church is just an excuse for HER to persecute true christian. TELL ME SOMETHING, IF CATHOLIC APOLOGISTS DON'T BELIEVE IN SOLA SCRIPTURA WHY DO THEY DEBATE PROTESTANTS, at the end of the day they can make what doctrine why want by thier assumed authority.
@medusa210562 That new interpretation of the quotations given by St Paul, to whom the Bereans were open, was argued by him AGAINST the current understanding of the scriptures which the Beroeans already had. This happened during Paul's 2nd missionary journey, his AUTHORITY having just recently been ratified BY THE CHURCH in Jerusalem. This is no Protestant with a MAN-MADE individualistic teaching opposed to the Church of Christ, but a man working in the UNITY of the Holy Spirit.
@medusa210562 Oh, not the old "the papacy was and is the Antichrist". Don't you know your Bible? The characteristics of antichrists are given in the first letter of John. "Every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist" Well, that kind of discounts the Catholic Pope, bishops & laity, doesn't it? That'll be you sounding credulous again... But hang on a minute, don't YOU deny that Jesus comes in the flesh in the Eucharist? LOL Get a life.
@medusa210562 I requested proof of your version of Church history, you have failed to provide & merely keep stating it as if stating it can make that fable true to you and to God. You may be able to fool yourself, you might even be able to fool others, but you cannot fool God who is the God of truth whom you WILL obey whether you like it or not because, unlike me, He is judge. I have proof that you oppose Biblical teaching (Heb 13:8-9). Your individualism is the spirit of the age.
@medusa210562 You write, "I am an elder at my church, so people submit to me in the real of our theological understanding ..No one has to obbey me like a dictator." I am just a lay Catholic, I obey my priest because he & I have the same basic theological understanding so he can tell me do almost anything he likes that is in line with the teaching of the ONE CHURCH founded on Christ, unlike your tradition which is founded on Luther & 'sola scripture' & unheard of before 1500AD.
@medusa210562 You write, "the word became flesh is not figuratively." As is evident to any logical person, that was my point. So you defend Giordano Bruno, the heretic who questioned the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the incarnation, and who proposed the reincarnation of human souls as animals, etc etc? Brutality (whether Catholic or Protestant) doesn't justify heresy.
@medusa210562 And where in the New Testament does it say that your individual opinion is to be placed above the teaching of the Church? 1 Pet 1:20-21 "... NO PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURE is a matter of ONE'S OWN INTERPRETATION, because NO PROPHECY ever came by the impulse of MAN, but men moved by the HOLY SPIRIT spoke from God." Rom 16:17 "I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the DOCTRINE WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN TAUGHT; avoid them."
@nepistepa No prophecy is a matter of interpretation, Means let the bible explain itself. I CANNOT LET THE CATHOLIC CHURCH INTERPRET IT FOR ME. I CANNOT GO AGAINST MY CONSCIENCE. The Holy spirit talks to me. And the Holy spirit tells me that God game me a brine to use it.
@medusa210562 You write, "I CANNOT GO AGAINST MY CONSCIENCE." That is true, but who or what has the authority to INFORM & GUIDE your conscience? The Bible tells us that such teaching authority is given to the Church, which then produces its manual, the Bible, not to replace Church teaching - how ridiculous - but to AID Church teaching.
@medusa210562 St Ignatius was one of the pupils of St John the apostle. Another pupil was St Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna for most of the time St Ignatius was bishop of Antioch. St Ignatius was writing to Smyrna when he wrote about those who "confess not that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ". St John was at Ephesus (& the Church there is mentioned in the book of Revelation). It was there that John trained Polycarp. These men defended the faith against heresy.
@medusa210562 Your comment about St Ignatius is what happens when one attempts to give the Bible one's own individual authority & interpretation. Antioch was one of the strongest centres of the apostolic teaching in the 1st century of the Church. St Paul set out from there, St Peter was bishop there till about AD53, his convert St Evodius followed him as bishop till about AD63 & he was followed as bishop by Ignatius. Evodius & Ignatius lived while the gospel of John was formed.
@medusa210562 St Ignatius was appointed bishop of Antioch while St Paul was still alive, so when he writes, he confirms the belief that the Eucharistic elements are the very Flesh which suffered for our sins. He opens up the gospel of John to us and shows us the depth of the teaching of St John, who taught Ignatius the faith. In Ignatius' letter to the Church in Smyrna, he defends apostolic teaching against the Docetist heresy which taught that Christ's human body was an illusion.
@medusa210562 Jesus never raised the individual above the communal, nor the communal about the individual. The Holy Spirit creates consensus, not schism. Your individualistic, schismatic beliefs make you equate your own personal judgement with the judgement of the Holy Spirit. There are thousands of Protestant sects. This cannot be of the Spirit. They cannot all be right. The Church was united for 1400 years against heresy until Luther & co thought they knew better.
@nepistepa The scripture does not create consensus of wrong doctrines. DOES NOT CREATE CONSENSUS OF WRONG DOCTRINES. These protestant sects as you call them were never allowed to start because people were afraid. Do you want to be afraid? Do you call that love? Say what you want about Martin Luther, But I DON'T RECALL THE POPE RUNNING AWAY FROM LUTHER SCARED FOR HIS LIFE. You are on Satan side. Change your ways.
@medusa210562 You write "These protestant sects ..were never allowed to start because people were afraid." Protestants were JUST AS BAD when they took over in northern Europe. That is history. Relying on scripture does indeed create a consensus of wrong doctrines. Either the Catholics & Orthodox consensus has been right from the start about eating the Flesh of Christ or the Protestant consensus has been right from the 16th century about denying it. Which consensus is of the Spirit?
@nepistepa YOU SAY WELL WHEN YOU SAY THE CHURCH WAS UNITED FOR 1400 YEARS AGAINST HERESY. YOU SAY WELL. FIRE TO BURN THE HERETICS WAS ONE METHOD. YOU ARE PREACHING ON THE SIDE OF SATAN. WAKE UP AND GIVE YOUR LIFE TO OUR LORD JESUS, NOT THE POPE.
@medusa210562 You write, "YOU ARE PREACHING ON THE SIDE OF SATAN." So when Protestants are burning Catholics as heretics, they WEREN'T preaching on the side of Satan? Catholic/Protestant state/mob murder is no indicator of whether the doctrine either of the Trinity or transubstantiation is from the Holy Spirit. The fact that Protestants burned people alive doesn't mean that believing in the Trinity was wrong. Likewise, transubstantiation was not wrong because of medieval brutality.
@nepistepa many peple called themselves protestans and they are not christian. But the crimes committed by the catholic church were committed by the catholic church. It's is black and white. There was even laws that were against people that didn't believe in transubstantiation. This law were enforced by kinks supported by the catholic church. THERE IS ONLY ONE CATHOLIC CHURCH. "you shall not kill" not so infallible to me.
@medusa210562 So drop the red herring about the rather obvious fact that Catholics and Protestants sanctioned murder on religious grounds. Christian belief in the Trinity and transubstantiation must be shown to be justified from other considerations. In the case of belief in eating the FLESH of Christ in the Eucharist, there is no historical proof that the Church has ever believed anything different. Jesus' words in St John's gospel themselves can be interpreted to refer to this.
@medusa210562 The proper question facing you is not how many people did Catholics & Protestants murder respectively, let's weigh it up. The proper question facing you is when was the Holy Spirit removed from the Church of God until the reformation so that she would fall into error. Was the Spirit removed from St John's pupils in the first Christian century? When the doctrine of the Trinity was finalised in the 4th century? After the last ecumenical council in the 9th?
In St John's gospel, Jesus says, "the bread that I shall give is my FLESH", not "my SPIRIT" or "my faith". St John wrote this because he literally believed it. No one taught what you Protestants teach for 1400 YEARS. You seem to believe that God would remove his Holy Spirit from the disciples of St John & therefore from the whole Church for 1400 years until you Protestants came along, yet mysteriously leave it able to interpret & define the canon of Scripture & the Trinity.
This guy is an idiot. The reason protestants have so many churches and so many denominations is that anyone can take the Bible and interpret it anyway they want and all of a sudden its the true interpretation of Gods Word! Whatever. They, nor any other church has claim to True Apostolic succesion except The Catholic Church. Read history. The Bible didnt even exist until the Catholic church put it together. Remember, the Bible is many books brought together. This idiot in this video is a quack!
@sbzombie69 hes just stateing his opinion, he doesnt expect u to take it as a fact, if u choose not to believe it than dont, but some may call u crazy for not believing what hes saying, its a circle that we will continue to go around and around on,
Jesus speaks symbolically, (John 4:31-34 and Matt 16:5-12) and corrects their misunderstanding. Jesus speaks figuratively in John 6:52-56. The Jews interpret Him literally. Why would Jesus let them walk away if they misunderstood Him? The rest, well you know, the last supper, Matt 26:26-28. The devil's job is to keep you away from the Holy Eucharist, away from our Lord (John 6:66)
As Christians we some to God and become his children by faith and acts of righteousness that springs from faith. By faith we eat the bread and drink the blood in remembrance of His death. Jesus body and blood are real spiritual food. We worship Jesus by faith. Faith is the only way to know and come to God. Either you trust God by faith or you do not. Eating bread in faith is the key to all of this. The bread and wine equates to Jesus body and blood that Jesus gave on the cross.
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 This doctrine of consubstantiation or whatever is a complete man-made innovation. Prove that such a teaching ever existed before the 11th century. Of course if you "have to use history" then you'll go against your beliefs, because your beliefs were made up in the 16th century, just like Mormon beliefs were made up in the 19th century. If they 'had to use history', they'd fall at the same obstacle as you. Where is your honesty? You think Protestants didn't kill Catholics?
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa I'm sorry, man, but I'm not talking to you anymore. I'm shaking the dust off my feet. You're a bigot, imagining that Protestants are nice people and Catholics are bad.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You are the epitome of living in denial. I asked you to prove your church is 2000 years old, you mention the Waldesians who believed in the Real Presence & penance! I'll pray for you, your bigoted attitude to Catholics, your credulity but most of all your lack of intellectual honesty. As I said, you might fool yourself, might even fool others & try to fool me, but you can't fool God who sees right through you into your motivations for wanting to believe lies. You're brainwashed.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa The church was always there. It was not popes but everyone the popes scared. It wasn't necessarily an organized church, because it was oppressed. It was make of millions that were killed by the Papacy during the dark ages.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 The 15th century Waldesian poem "Noble Lesson" says, "To make our confession sincerely, without any defect, & to do penance during the present life ... indeed, through these things the soul finds salvation."The Waldesian confession of faith of 1508AD professed belief in the priesthood, all 7 sacraments of the Catholic Church, including infant baptism, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and priestly absolution from sin. These are doctrines of the 2nd & 3rd century Church.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa I don't recall the Waldensian trying to kill the papacy, I recall the ather way rould, What about the dogma "you shall not kill" their were practically catholics who wanted to spread the bible AND YOU POEPLE STILL KILLED THEM, YOU STILL KILLED THEM, IMMAGINE IF THEY HAD BELIEVED MORE BIBLICAL DOCTRINES, YOU WOULD HAVE PURGED THEM WITH FIRE.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 I'm sorry, man, but, at this point, I'm going to have to sign off. I can hear Wisdom cry in the marketplace to her playmates. Or else it's Big Ben in London singing a song about you, going, "Brainwashed brainwaaaashed, brainwashed brainwaaaashed." Who has taught you to put your faith in ahistorical nonsense and man-made fairytales of a 2000 year old sola scriptura church that never existed? Have you no self-critical faculty? Can't you question what you've been told?
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Here you go again, "Catholics kill people, Protestants don't". What a pile of absolute nonsense. You really need to take a look at your flagrant bigotry. What did Protestant Elizabeth I of England do to Catholics? What did Protestant Oliver Cromwell do to Catholics? What did the Protestant English do to the Catholic Irish? Brainwashed, brainwaaaaashed. You're no better than a bigot, educated in historical fantasies. As I've said, no self-critical faculty.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa Hang on a moment protestants are sinners like me. The pope is the infallible one who coherence kings to make laws to squash heretics for about 1300 years.
medusa210562 1 week ago
Jesus Christ is crucified mystically in the Catholic Mass. Jesus is TRUE BODY AND BLOOD during the consecration of the mass. This is not merely a symbol but TRUE FLESH AND BLOOD! Over time people have not believed in the consecration. There are countless scientific proofs- read "Miracles of the Eucharist" found around the world. Read the life of Gemma Galgani, she will bring everyone close to God. Jesus is so sadden of people not believing in his presence in the Eucharist. PRAY to see the truth
TheLmaoman 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE BREAD which I shall give for the life of the world IS MY FLESH. He who is UNITED TO THE LORD becomes ONE SPIRIT WITH HIM. Unless you eat the FLESH of the Son of man and DRINK HIS BLOOD, you have no life in you. Take: this is my BODY .. This is my BLOOD. Because there is ONE BREAD, we who are many are ONE BODY, for we all partake of the ONE BREAD. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of PROFANING THE BODY AND BLOOD of the Lord.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
If the Church herself is the Mystical Body of Christ, then the following words of St Paul on the matter are extremely significant. "The Bread which we break, is it not a participation in the Body of Christ? Because there is one Bread, we who are many are one Body, for we all partake of the one Bread." St Paul sees 'one Bread' as a uniting factor in the one Body of which Christ is the head. How can an ordinary loaf cause incorporation into Christ's Mystical Body, which involves union with Christ?
nepistepa 2 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@Nicklas07 scripture is full of people called father - "our father Abraham" (google call no man father) and what did you call that guy your mother was married to? Just sayin'.
sue200012 1 month ago
@sue200012 Point well made Sue, however the statement made by Yeshua ha Mashiach (aka Jesus The Christ) was brand spanking new at the time. The Pharisees & Sadducees considered Yeshua a blasphemer, a heretic, a demon, so even if they DID hear him say that about calling anyone Father, I doubt they would drop the way they addressed any male kin, don't you think? Anyway, I taught all my children to call me Dad, or Daddy, or by my first name, but that their Father is my Father too. Peace
Kazyman 1 month ago
@Kazyman What a wonderful lesson for your children. God bless you.
sue200012 1 month ago
His flesh is true food. Transubstantiation is not true, there is no more need of an alter and sacrifices, read hebrew. The catholic church still practices sacrifices on an alter. Jesus flesh is true food. It heals me it saves me. think about it the bread became flash but I don't exept his true flesh I am lost. But if the bread doesn't become flesh. I accept his flesh. Transubstantiation is catholic magic. Cathekism is nice philosophy it can be made to sound nice but it is not biblical.
medusa210562 1 month ago
@medusa210562 If it's not true, why didn't Jesus say "this is bread and wine", eat and drink it in remembrance of me. He didn't, He said this is my body, my blood. Being biblical" doesn't answer all questions. (OBTW, the Catholic church gave the world the bible.) There are also traditions Paul said to hold fast to.
sue200012 1 month ago
@sue200012 Mark 7:8 "you have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions." there are traditions of man. how do we know the difference? Atcs 17:10 gives you the answer. The catholic church didn't give us the bible, it stopped the average person from reading it for hundreds of years. the Waldensian and many like them died for this reason. I ACCEPT THE BODY AND THE BLOOD OF CHRIST FOR MY SALVATION. IN REMEMBRANCE, IN REMEMBRANCE OF WHAT HAPPENED AT CALVARY.
medusa210562 1 month ago
@medusa210562 How can we profane the "body and blood of the Lord" by eating of an ordinary loaf or drinking ordinary wine? "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. ..For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself." Profaning an ordinary loaf, no matter how blessed, cannot be equated with profaning the "body and blood of the Lord".
nepistepa 2 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@medusa210562 We are 'one body', 'the body of Christ', not because we eat of an ordinary 'fleshly' (material) loaf but of spiritual bread from heaven spoken of in Capernaum. "It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail." Likewise, St Paul does not describe ordinary 'fleshly' (material) bread but the Bread of Life, which is the very flesh of our Lord's spiritual, resurrected body, and He says clearly "..THE BREAD which I shall give for the life of the world IS MY FLESH."
nepistepa 2 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@medusa210562 Jesus does NOT say that the BREAD OF LIFE is his WORD or his SPIRIT or FAITH in him; no, he says that the BREAD OF LIFE IS his very FLESH (and, we deduce, also his very blood). 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 you; he who EATS MY FLESH and DRINKS MY BLOOD has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is FOOD INDEED, and my blood is DRINK INDEED."
nepistepa 2 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@nepistepa "we are one body" is that literal too. literal in a physical sense? NO. I accept His Body and His blood but not transubstantiation. 5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. We eat spiritual bread from heaven, Not transubstantiation, the bread people eat at mass is only a physical bread, but they can accept the body of Christ in their heart,( in memory)
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 When you say that, "Jesus does NOT say that the BREAD OF LIFE is his WORD or his SPIRIT or FAITH in him or the Eucharist, he says that the BREAD OF LIFE IS his very FLESH," you quote me, adding "or the Eucharist". The Eucharist is a rite, not his BODY and BLOOD. In Matt, our Lord says, "This is my BODY ..." and these are the words used in the rite. Is His FLESH not part of His BODY? How ridiculous.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 You say, "We eat spiritual bread from heaven ..." And what is that spiritual bread from heaven? The Counsellor SPIRIT of the Son? In the Eucharist, the Church EATS the BREAD OF LIFE, the FLESH of CHRIST and has life within Her.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa trambsustatiation in not in the bible. Jesus says He is the light of the world, He is the truth. He is the good Shepperd. He is our food. All of this we accept by faith. He did say " eat of my body and drink of by blood" but you cannot do this physically, and it is not necessary for you to do this physically. This is sinful doctrine.
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 Yes, transubstantiation is not mentioned in the Bible, but neither are blood circulation or the Trinity, so the absence of explicit reference to any of these are hardly argument against them.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa Jesus does NOT say that the BREAD OF LIFE is his WORD or his SPIRIT or FAITH in him or the Eucharist, he says that the BREAD OF LIFE IS his very FLESH
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 Obviously, we people in the Church do not all share the same physical body but we are all joined to Christ. 1 Cor 6:15-17 "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I therefore take the members of Christ & make them members of a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, "The two shall become one flesh. But he who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him."
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 How does Christ's Mystical Body exist with Its Head? Through our spirits being one Spirit with each other and with Christ. Eph 2:19-21 "you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together" "Unless you EAT THE FLESH of the Son of man and DRINK HIS BLOOD", this condition of being one in Christ is unachievable.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 1 Cor 15 "The last Adam [Jesus] became a life-giving Spirit ... flesh & blood can't inherit the kingdom of God nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable." Yes, the BREAD OF LIFE is His very FLESH so if we are to become one SPIRIT with Him, we must listen to Him. "This is my BODY ... this is my BLOOD ..unless you EAT THE FLESH of the Son of Man and DRINK HIS BLOOD [not merely receive GRACE/have FAITH/receive His SPIRIT, although these are necessary] you have not LIFE in you."
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa I eat His body I partake of His broken body which heals me, and I drink of His Blood which gives me life. Transubstantiation comes form the devil. By the way many protestant martyrs died because they believed what I believe. The catholic church burned them at the stake CATHOLIC MAGIC, HAVE A GOOD DAY
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 And how does ordinary bread and wine 'heal you' and 'give you life'? How can one be ένοχος (liable to, answerable to, guilty of sin against) ordinary bread? Or μη διακρίνων (not recognising, not discerning) ordinary wine? If the Jews were "baptised into Moses" and "ate the same spiritual food" and "drank from the spiritual rock", which were real food & drink, so much more does the Church. It is the BREAD OF LIFE, His FLESH, food indeed, His BLOOD, drink indeed, which heals.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 Only 65 years or so after the crucifixion, St Ignatius wrote, "They withhold themselves from Eucharist ..because they confess not that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which flesh suffered for our sins, and which in His loving-kindness the Father raised up." The Father didn't send us an authoritative book but a living man & the Son of Man didn't write a qur'an but gave his authority to His living Church, which has written, interpreted and canonised scripture.
nepistepa 2 weeks ago
@nepistepa St ignatius was not a bible writes just like me and you. So please don't quote such people with a protestant like me.
Now the bread and the wine don't heal me but the real bread and the real wine do. As I partake of the holy supper, in memory, Transubstantiation is from magic, like all the catholic sacraments, Magic, Can transubstantiation give salvation to a catholic who partakes but doesn't believe in hi her heart?
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
@medusa210562 You write, "Can transubstantiation give salvation to a Catholic who partakes but doesn't believe in hi her heart?" And you claim to "know the bible"! Read 1 Cor 11:27-29 "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself ... For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself."
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nepistepa 1 Cor 11:27-29 "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself ... For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself." That counts for me, not just for Catholics REGARDLESS OF THE FALSE THE TRANSUBSTANTIATION BELIEF
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 How can you "drink judgment upon" yourself by eating ordinary bread? The bread is the Bread of Life, the very Flesh of Jesus Christ. 1 Cor 10:16-17 "The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread." How can partaking of ordinary bread possibly join the members of the Mystical Body of Christ together and create one Church? No, we eat the one Bread of Life.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa I don't partake of ordinary bread, But the bread I eat is just physically bread.
But I a protestant who does not believe in transubstantiation, eat the bread and drink the wine that represents the body and the blood of Christ. So doing I truly partake of His broken body and shead blood. And I am judged as to how I do this in my heart. As were the Judas (not honestly) and the other 11 (humbly}
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "transubstantiation is from magic". You sound like an atheist. Matt 18:20 "For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them." I suppose that's magic too, then. If you follow their way of thinking, You'll be telling me that prayers for healing are magic spells next. God is not magic, He is commanded by no one.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa St. ignatius was one of the savage wolves according to ACTS 20:29 How do I know? Because I know the bible
medusa210562 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Are St John the Apostle & Polycarp two of the "wolves St Paul foretold? Come off it. Is St Ignatius, bishop of Antioch (of all places), also a pupil of John and martyred for the faith, was one of such "wolves"? This is laughable. You seem to think the guidance of the Holy Spirit was withdrawn from the Body of Christ immediately upon the death of St John. If that's what your individualistic assessment of Church history is, I can only say, "Look where Protestantism leaves people."
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 St John, St Polycarp and St Ignatius were all alive and active in the main Christian centres at the same time. Polycarp and Ignatius were taught the gospel by St John. St Ignatius is holy and blessed martyr for the gospel who you treat with a contempt that surely only speaks of ignorance. It is written that St Peter himself appointed Ignatius as bishop of Antioch. The Church of Antioch was a well-established stronghold of the gospel and firmly ground in apostolic teaching.
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 The Docetists taught that when St John wrote, "the word became flesh," he was speaking figuratively. St Ignatius maintains true apostolic teaching on the flesh of Christ & even offered his own flesh in holy martyrdom. Like you, the Docetists denied that the Eucharistic elements were the flesh & blood of Christ. Who are you? Did you sit at the feet of St John & hear the gospel from his lips? Do you really believe that you know what John's words meant better than Ignatius, his pupil?
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa the word became flesh is not figuratively, The word was with God and the word became flash. The word became Jesus. John 1 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. Acts 10:17 You see no man is required to accept another man doctrine without using his own intelligence.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "no man is required to accept another man doctrine without using his own intelligence." The Holy Spirit, however, operates differently. Your thinking must be shaped into the consensus of the Church. Individual Protestants all using their own independent intelligence just produces schism and disunity.
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 The early apostolic Church which was thrown out of the synagogues and persecuted by pagans in the first centuries AD believed that they ate the Flesh of Christ in the Eucharist. St Ignatius, the pupil of St John, was one such martyr (the word means 'witness') persecuted for the apostolic faith. They defend the apostolic teaching against many heresies, including docetism & gnosticism. When do you say God removed His Spirit from these martyrs who ate the Flesh of Christ?
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 The New Testament that you give such authority to is a product of the Church. It was the Church who decided which books would go into it and which books would be declared heretical. This was done under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The contents of the New Testament canon were finalised in the 5th century. The doctrine of the Trinity was only finalised under the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the 4th century. Do you think that you have the Holy Spirit and these men did not?
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa The church is not the catholic church, is made of man that belong to the catholic church and other church. For example many heretics burned at the stake by the pope were part of the real church. Giordano bruni was part of the real church. Some man of God put the bible together, doesn't matter if they were catholic or not to me. THEN UNFORTUNATELY PEOPLE WERE FORBIDDEN TO READ IT FOR A LONG TIME THAT WAS THE DEVILS DOING THROUGH THE CHURCH OF ROME.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 These men gave you the Bible under God's guidance & the interpretation of the Holy Spirit. You need to refer to them for that spiritual guidance & interpretation of scripture. The Bible receives its authority from the Church. The Church received its authority not from the Bible but from Christ & the apostles. Matt 16:18 "I will build my church & the powers of Hades shall not prevail against it." The Bible is not "the pilllar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15), it is the Church.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa the church in 1tim 3 is the church of God not the catholic church.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "the church in 1tim 3 is the church of God not the catholic church." The word "catholic" means "according to the whole", ie, not schismatic religion but united in spirit, united in teaching. The Church of the ecumenical councils which interpreted/canonised scripture & taught the Trinity AND that the Church eats the FLESH of Christ in the Eucharist, its teaching is preserved only in Catholic Orthodox teaching, not in thousands of schismatic Protestant sects.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa I believe in the trinity and I believe when I am gathered with other Christians, God is there. And I believe I eat His body and drink His blood. Truly for my spiritual well being. I don't eat His Body and drink His blood, for my physical well being.
THEREFORE YOU CAN KEEP ON PRACTICING CATHOLIC MAGIC, I DON'T NEED TRANSUBSTANTIATION TO PARTAKE OF HIS BODY AND BLOOD, FOR THE HEALING OF MY SOUL . There is not biblical support for it.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 It's good that you believe in the Trinity. This is the teaching of the pupils of St John. It is not good that you follow the docetists who don't believe in eating the Flesh of Christ in the Eucharist, against the teaching of the pupils of St John. The Church has followed this teaching ever since the beginning under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Until the Reformation, for 1400 years, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, she followed this teaching, received from John.
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa I don't believe in transubstantiation it is only fabricated, The bread and the wine symbolism only. The literal part is that we eat the true body and drink the true blood spiritually. You can say in a thousand ways but you are only make interpretation.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 "You can say in a thousand ways but you are only make interpretation." But the point that you are ignoring is which interpretation of the gospel of John is of the Holy Spirit - the Church's or yours? And how does someone approaching belief in Christ discern whether or not the pupils of St John had the Holy Spirit when believing they ate the Flesh of Christ in the Eucharist?
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa John didn't believe how you do, He believed how I do. The question about approacing belief is very important here, for protestant is equal to everyone, for catholic is not sola scriptura, so you can say what you want, because you can go out of the scripture at the end of it all, and say what you want.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 It's all very well to criticise uneducated people, that doesn't invalidate the science they should know. There is nothing wrong with statues, only worshipping them as gods. One cannot "say what you want" if one is formed and guided by apostolic teaching, which has been built up stone upon stone. You write, "the Church as always been unitety". So who was in the united Church in the 2nd to 5th centuries then? I'll be fascinated by your Protestant answer.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nepistepa The catholic church took away the part about "you shall not make statues" the best defense you have against what I am saying is that it is still there in the catholic bible. BUT LOOK AT THE DAMAGE THIS HAS CAUSED, BOOK AND BOOKS COULD BE WRITTEN ABOUT IT. I used to live in Italy, I used to play the clarinet behind the processions of saints. NOTHING SHORT OF PAGANISM. it's wrong to bow to a statue of a saint, called it veneration, or what you like, Exodus 20:4
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Why will I be fascinated by your answer to which historical figures were in the united Church in the 2nd & 3rd centuries then? Because, after you've excluded all the heretics who deny Christ's divinity or humanity, you'll be left with people who believed in eating the Flesh of the risen Christ in the Eucharist, having bishops, baptising children, the intercession of the saints, public & private confession, penance. Who was in your 'always united' Church then?
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa The true Christians in the second and third centuries were few just like now.
medusa210562 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 You write, "The true Christians in the second and third centuries were few just like now. That is not what I asked. I asked who they were. Name them if they existed as you claim they do. If you can't name such people (as there is no historical record of such people), then such a tradition of a 2nd & 3rd united Protestant church is only a MAN-MADE TRADITION invented to support a 4 centuries old Protestant tradition, a historical lie, an affront to the educated.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "The literal part is that we eat the true body and drink the true blood spiritually." How can you LITERALLY EAT Christ's Flesh SPIRITUALLY without believing that you are eating His FLESH? Christ has a resurrected BODY, he is not merely a resurrected SPIRIT. Don't you believe in the resurrection of the BODY? Oh, I forgot, you probably don't believe the Holy Spirit was in the Church which created the Nicene creed which teaches the resurrection of the body ...
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa Jesus says that we he will partake again of this supper when he returns and we are in heavel toghether, Well them we will still do this in memory of the immense sacrifice Jesus suffered on the cross, but not for the remission of our sins. It is always "in memory" "do this in memory of me" We eat physical bread physically, and we eat His broken body spiritually, all at the same time. Transubstantiation is a human invention, and sinful.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@nepistepa You don't know the church. The church was the heretics burned at the stake.
medusa210562 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 You write, "You don't know the church. The church was the heretics burned at the stake." Protestants burned heretics at the stake. Perhaps you don't know Protestantism. You certainly seem to ignore Protestant sins at the expense of Catholics.
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Your "make your own mind up" approach, which promotes schism and requires no consensus, is modern individualism, pure and simple. It just promotes the creation of all kind of individualist interpretations & so-called "revelations" like those of Mormonism & the Jehovah Witness. Catholic Orthodox teaching is ancient & established and, with regard to the Eucharist, as old as St John and his pupils. Catholics martyrs, killed by pagans, Protestants and atheists, have witnessed to this.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa People must be allowed to make their mind up. True ecumenism is to let the people study the scripture for themselves, ecumenism as the catholic church teaches it, is something that will end as a pope as a dictator. Don't you remember Galileo was scared to say what he believed about the planets. And don't you remember even during Mussolini in Italy some protestant were in Jail for not agreeying with the catholic church. Only 70 year ago.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "People must be allowed to make their mind up". Yes, but they must also allow it to be FORMED & GUIDED by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit creates consensus, not thousands of sects all disagreeing with other. Such disagreement is a sign of mere human individualism, not the unifying Spirit of Christ. Mussoline was a fascist, hardly an example of Catholic teaching in practice. You'll be presenting forward Hitler as an example Catholic next.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa FORMED & GUIDED by the Holy Spirit. Millions of Catholics don't know what the catholic church believes, you are happy with that. You only use your energy to bring protestants to the catholic church. when no one had the bible and Catholics followed the pope blindly the Vatican was happy, no division only one church HOW NICE.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write accusing me of believing in Catholics not being FORMED & GUIDED, You need to read my messages with a little more mental acumen.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa About catholics being formed and guided, that is not what I said. What I am saying is YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO TELL ME, Good. But millions of catholics don't even know what the catholic church believes. I know I am Italian. That say it all.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Only a Protestant could suggest that unity of basic Church teaching could ever be achieved by the Holy Spirit letting everybody have their own opinions! Look at the reality! Look at history! The history of Protestantism is just a history of the multiplication of sects and disunity which only worsens as time goes by. Wake up! It is the Catholic Orthodox who hold the spirit-filled teachings of the first five centuries.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa The history of protestantism is not good. But the only other option history revels is the dictatorial dark ages where heretics were killed. The waldensian. Giordano bruni. Millions were killed because they did not agree with the catholic church. there is one true church and is made of people of all denominations who truly love Jesus Christ.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "the only other option history revels is the dictatorial dark ages where heretics were killed." This is not realistic. ALL modern Christians are well aware of the dark parts of Christian history where their own behaviour, both CATHOLIC and PROTESTANT contradicts the gospel in such an evil way. Which modern Christian group either advocates killing people for heresy or practices it? Again, you mention the heretic Giordano Bruno, who denied Christ.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa Giordano bruno didn't kill anyone. The church killed him. Can you not see
medusa210562 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 You write, "Giordano bruno didn't kill anyone. The church killed him. Can you not see" St John Ogilvie didn't kill anyojne. Can you not see?
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa there was always some people that wanted to contradict the catholic church and were afraid. Didn't they kill some of Luther's friends. I don't agree with any catholic believes even the trinity or other doctrines that seam to be similar to mine, are not exactly the same when studied carefully, I was a catholic. My grandmother used to self flagellate. And go allover Italy visiting the statues of saints that manifested supernatural phenomena. I have seen the dark ages.
medusa210562 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 You write, "I don't agree with any catholic believes even the trinity or other doctrines that seam to be similar to mine, are not exactly the same when studied carefully" Well, if you don't believe the Trinity as taught in Catholic Orthodoxy, then you are out of line even with mainstream Protestantism & even mainstream Protestant evangelicalism. So much for the unity of the Holy Spirit in your case.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 I'm sorry that your mother disagrees with Doctor of the Church St Therese of Lisieux and self-flagellates. As for whether any such statues are evidence of miracles, I'll leave that to her credulity. Authoritative Church teaching & practice are mandated for Catholics. Catholics are not required to believe in any given putatively miraculous statue.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa I grew up in Italy there a thousands of miraculous statues, that is the consequence of taking away the second commandment, the one found in exodus 20. Please don't talk to me about the numbering of the commandments according to Catholics protestants and Jewish. I only believe in exodus 20
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 So come one, exactly when was the unity of the Holy Spirit withdrawn from the Church? First century? Was it the early martyrs such as St Ignatius, the pupil of St John and 3rd bishop of Antioch who went astray? Second century? Was it those such as Irenaeus who is first known to regard all gospels as uninspired except the current canonical gospels? Third century? Was it the likes of the martyr Pope Stephen I who stood up against baptising people twice? The Fourth century?
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa the church as always been unitety, but not in fear of the Papacy, The church is made of followers of Christ, not Catholics. The Holy spirit has always been with them. The catholic church is just a religious political power, with the emphasis on power.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Provide evidence of your 'sola scriptura' 'united church' ever existing in the 2nd or 3rd century. You believe in an unscriptural transmission of authority & spiritual power to a BOOK. Christianity is not Islam. We do not give the Bible the same authority that Muslims give the Qur'an. God sent us not a book but His Son who built his Church, not wrote a book. Books are subject to divisive individual interpretation. Church is guided by Spirit. The letter kills, the Spirit gives life.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa If it wasn't for the bible I would be a flagellating catholic,I would pay money to the priest to help my grandfather live purgatory earlier.I would bow to Mary and the saints. As if they were not created and forgiven like me.I would wonder if it is wrong to be intimate with my wife.I would follow and fear man instead of God.I would confess my sins to another man without having done nothing wrong against such man.I would believe in magical sacraments like baptism of infants.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "..I would pay money to the priest to help my grandfather live purgatory earlier." Catholics do not pay to get people out of purgatory. They make offerings to God. Catholics & Protestants do this every Sunday, at baptisms, weddings and funerals. 1 Cor 9:13-14 "..Those who are employed in the temple service ..share in the sacrificial offerings.. In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel."
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "I would bow to Mary and the saints." Bowing, curtseying or lowering the head are signs of respect and assent, common throughout the world. They do not constitute worship. 1 Peter 2:17 says, "Honour all men." We should certainly therefore honour blessed Mary and the saints of God.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 I have to chortle at you Protestants who believe your Church with its Protestant beliefs has always existed, even in the first three centuries AD, despite having no evidence that can show that such a group of people united in such beliefs existed at that period. Your Protestantism is not even 400 years old, a "sola fide" child of Luther, the progenitor of THOUSANDS of disunitied sects. Such a phenomenon can be judged from its all too evident fruit.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 The division and multiplication of heresy, where the individual is raised over community, or community raised over the individual, where spirit-guided consensus is eventually whittled away into fragmented community, this is exactly the opposite of the workings of the Spirit. Catholicism has the magisterium against which any Catholic can be measured. What do Protestant sects have? THEIR OWN PERSONAL VIEW ON MATTERS.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 So, if a couple of Protestants want to create their own literal sect and lead others astray, because they interpret the Bible as showing that the Son as being inferior to the Father, what can dissuade them if they refuse to recognise the unity of the Body of Christ under the guidance of the Holy Spirit? If they want to believe that the word "flesh" is only figurative with regard to Christ's earthly body, what can dissuade them? Jesus did not plan such an individualistic religion.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 Jesus created a Body, a Church, which is united to Him, Spirit AND Flesh. He gave the leaders of this Church his authority. This is the Biblical model. There is no other model of authority present in scripture. If you truly believe in the scripture, then you can see that the (only 400 years old) tradition of Jesus' authority being given to scripture is a MAN MADE tradition & NOT SCRIPTURAL. You are deceived if you think 'sola scriptura' authority is scriptural & Jesus' intention.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 "In like manner these men in their dreamings ..REJECT AUTHORITY ..but you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; they said to you, "In the last time there will be SCOFFERS, following their own ungodly passions." It is these who SET UP DIVISIONS, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit. But you, beloved, build yourselves up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit ..and convince some, who doubt" St Jude on authority.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Jude on those who reject authority - "These are grumblers, malcontents, following their own passions, loud-mouthed boasters, flattering people to gain advantage." Hebrews 13:17 "Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account." 2 Peter 2:9-10 "the Lord knows how ..to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who ...despise authority."
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa you are the one who rejects my authority, that cames to me from God. To tell you to read the bible and not follow the pope advice or mine in regard to doctrines. you reject my authority. I submit myself to the counsel of saitly man, who don't comand me, but lead me gently in the way of Jesus. You are difendint dictatorship by giving this authority to the catholic church, who wants to burn me at the stake, and ignore my cancience
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "..my authority, that cames to me from God ..you reject my authority." With these words, you are guilty of spiritual pride. You write, "I submit myself to the ..man ..who don't comand me.." The commands are from the Body of Christ, not the man. You write, "..theologians like you.." I am not a trained theologian. You write, "If it wasn't for the bible I would be a flagellating catholic." Only if you had no interest in learning Church teaching about rigorism.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Perhaps you are just rebelling against the Church because of people who do not follow the teachings of the Church perfectly. That is no excuse for denying the (historically provable!) doctrinally united Church of almost 2 millenia, doctrine perfectly arguable from scripture. Crime being committed does not make law wrong. If you cut yourself from the 2 millenia of organic doctrinal unity for the sake of 400 years of Protestantism sectarian division, you hurt the Church & yourself.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa the best catholics are the ignorant once you and the pope don't care much about, ( but care much to change my mind) theologians like you and the bishops are exectly in the predicament of the pharisees, who were in a place of authority but had non
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "..the catholic church.. wants to burn me at the stake.." This last statement, along with your belief in the existence of a 2nd & 3rd century Protestant 'sola fide' united Church, demonstrate such a lack of recognition of reality that I have decided to abandon reasoning with you. You have succumbed to a spiritual pride which leads you into irrational argument, probably an over-reaction to things in your childhood, who knows, but there is no reasoning with such a person.
nepistepa 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 I will pray for you. A clear lack of formation in Church teaching has led to rebellion, elevation of the self, spiritual pride, self-assignation of authority, an irrational fear of the Body of Christ, man-made historical fantasies & even denial of present reality. Many Catholics have problems with certain Church teaching but they wouldn't leave God's Holy Church willingly. This is because they recognise the unity of Christ and that Catholics cannot all agree on everything.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 I sense a lack of balance in you. The Catechism, paragraph 1782, says, "Man has the right to act in conscience & in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions." 1792 says, "Ignorance of Christ & his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority & her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct."
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Experience has led you further and further from the teaching of the Church, whereas experience has led me further and further towards the teaching of the Church. You have come to trust in the "power" of the Bible. I see more and more that the Bible can be interpreted to justify horrific behaviour and that only Church teaching & authority stands as a "pillar & bulwark" in rejection of such misinterpretation. I will pray for you and I hope that you will pray for me too.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 By the way, you write, "I submit myself to the counsel of saitly man, who don't comand me, but lead me gently in the way of Jesus." That is not submission, that is assent. If you are to reason correctly, you must differentiate between assent and submission. Submission is obedience to someone's will and desire. Assent is approval of or agreement with someone's viewpoint.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 By the way, you write, "I submit myself to the counsel of saitly man, who don't comand me, but lead me gently in the way of Jesus." That is not submission, that is assent. If you are to reason correctly, you must differentiate between assent and submission. Submission is obedience to someone's will and desire. Assent is approval of or agreement with someone's viewpoint.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Hebrews 13:17 OBEY your leaders and SUBMIT to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account." 1 Peter 5:6 "Likewise you that are younger BE SUBJECT to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with HUMILITY toward one another, for "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the HUMBLE. Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that in due time he may exalt you." This is scripture, which you teach against.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Hebrews 13:8-9 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday & today & forever. Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings for it is well that the heart be strengthened by grace.." The Church and Her teaching is one with Christ yesterday & today & forever. Diverse & often strange MAN-MADE 400-year-old Protestant teachings are no benefit as the Bible became the plaything of the individual soul. Luther didn't found a "true" Church 400 years ago, the Church was founded by Jesus Christ.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa protestants are 400 years olf because the once before them were burned at the stake. I am an elder at my church, so people submit to me in the real of our theological understanding. No one has to obbey me like a dictator. God bless. My church was started by Jesus 2 thousand year ago.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You have failed to provide evidence to back up your statement that your church "was started by Jesus 2 thousand year ago". You have not provide evidence for it in the 2nd or 3rd centuries. You are therefore living in a historical cloud-cuckoo land. This does not speak well for your judgement. You also object to scriptural commands to obey and submit to leaders (Heb 13:17) so your pretence to giving the Bible authority is sadly misguided: you oppose it.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa I don't really need church History all I need is the bible. But in any case what were the Waldensian to you? tell what were the Waldensian in the north of Italy in your way of thinking? They were church to me. And as you can imagine the papacy was and is the Antichrist. And I can question another human being, protestant or catholic, read acts 17:11
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 How ignorance leads to credulity. Listen, even anti-Catholic historians accept that that sect was founded by Peter Waldo in the 12th century. Waldo originally held to Church doctrine and hoped to get Papal approval for his movement. We have his (orthodox) statement of faith from 1180AD which states that "faith without works is dead"! Waldo believed in transubstantiation, prayers for the dead, and infant baptism!
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Your MAN-MADE tradition that a Church has always existed teaching 'sola scriptura' is ahistorical myth which only the ignorant or credulous believe in. 'Sola scriptura' is an invention of Luther. The Biblical model of transmission of teaching authority is by the laying on of hands within an orthodox Church. There is no other Biblical model. The doctrine you teach is MAN-MADE and opposes Biblical teaching.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Acts 17:11 isn't about CHRISTIANS A checking the Scriptures to see if CHRISTIANS B are QUOTING them properly AND INTERPRETING them according to how THEY, CHRISTIANS A, already interpret them. It's about JEWS checking the Scriptures ONLY to see if St Paul, the CHRISTIAN is QUOTING them properly AND NOT to see if Paul INTERPRETS them according to how THEY, JEWS already interpret them. Sheesh. The Berean Jews were OPEN to an interpretation different from their own.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa Jews or not no man is above the scripture,"If anyone does not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn." isaiah 8"20 The rejection of sola cripture by the catholic church is just an excuse for HER to persecute true christian. TELL ME SOMETHING, IF CATHOLIC APOLOGISTS DON'T BELIEVE IN SOLA SCRIPTURA WHY DO THEY DEBATE PROTESTANTS, at the end of the day they can make what doctrine why want by thier assumed authority.
medusa210562 1 week ago
Comment removed
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 That new interpretation of the quotations given by St Paul, to whom the Bereans were open, was argued by him AGAINST the current understanding of the scriptures which the Beroeans already had. This happened during Paul's 2nd missionary journey, his AUTHORITY having just recently been ratified BY THE CHURCH in Jerusalem. This is no Protestant with a MAN-MADE individualistic teaching opposed to the Church of Christ, but a man working in the UNITY of the Holy Spirit.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Oh, not the old "the papacy was and is the Antichrist". Don't you know your Bible? The characteristics of antichrists are given in the first letter of John. "Every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist" Well, that kind of discounts the Catholic Pope, bishops & laity, doesn't it? That'll be you sounding credulous again... But hang on a minute, don't YOU deny that Jesus comes in the flesh in the Eucharist? LOL Get a life.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 I requested proof of your version of Church history, you have failed to provide & merely keep stating it as if stating it can make that fable true to you and to God. You may be able to fool yourself, you might even be able to fool others, but you cannot fool God who is the God of truth whom you WILL obey whether you like it or not because, unlike me, He is judge. I have proof that you oppose Biblical teaching (Heb 13:8-9). Your individualism is the spirit of the age.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "I am an elder at my church, so people submit to me in the real of our theological understanding ..No one has to obbey me like a dictator." I am just a lay Catholic, I obey my priest because he & I have the same basic theological understanding so he can tell me do almost anything he likes that is in line with the teaching of the ONE CHURCH founded on Christ, unlike your tradition which is founded on Luther & 'sola scripture' & unheard of before 1500AD.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa my Church was founded by Jesus. Not by the Roman church of the dark ages that killed millions of heretics "like me"
medusa210562 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 You write, "the word became flesh is not figuratively." As is evident to any logical person, that was my point. So you defend Giordano Bruno, the heretic who questioned the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the incarnation, and who proposed the reincarnation of human souls as animals, etc etc? Brutality (whether Catholic or Protestant) doesn't justify heresy.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 And where in the New Testament does it say that your individual opinion is to be placed above the teaching of the Church? 1 Pet 1:20-21 "... NO PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURE is a matter of ONE'S OWN INTERPRETATION, because NO PROPHECY ever came by the impulse of MAN, but men moved by the HOLY SPIRIT spoke from God." Rom 16:17 "I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the DOCTRINE WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN TAUGHT; avoid them."
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa No prophecy is a matter of interpretation, Means let the bible explain itself. I CANNOT LET THE CATHOLIC CHURCH INTERPRET IT FOR ME. I CANNOT GO AGAINST MY CONSCIENCE. The Holy spirit talks to me. And the Holy spirit tells me that God game me a brine to use it.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "I CANNOT GO AGAINST MY CONSCIENCE." That is true, but who or what has the authority to INFORM & GUIDE your conscience? The Bible tells us that such teaching authority is given to the Church, which then produces its manual, the Bible, not to replace Church teaching - how ridiculous - but to AID Church teaching.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 St Ignatius was one of the pupils of St John the apostle. Another pupil was St Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna for most of the time St Ignatius was bishop of Antioch. St Ignatius was writing to Smyrna when he wrote about those who "confess not that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ". St John was at Ephesus (& the Church there is mentioned in the book of Revelation). It was there that John trained Polycarp. These men defended the faith against heresy.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 Your comment about St Ignatius is what happens when one attempts to give the Bible one's own individual authority & interpretation. Antioch was one of the strongest centres of the apostolic teaching in the 1st century of the Church. St Paul set out from there, St Peter was bishop there till about AD53, his convert St Evodius followed him as bishop till about AD63 & he was followed as bishop by Ignatius. Evodius & Ignatius lived while the gospel of John was formed.
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@medusa210562 St Ignatius was appointed bishop of Antioch while St Paul was still alive, so when he writes, he confirms the belief that the Eucharistic elements are the very Flesh which suffered for our sins. He opens up the gospel of John to us and shows us the depth of the teaching of St John, who taught Ignatius the faith. In Ignatius' letter to the Church in Smyrna, he defends apostolic teaching against the Docetist heresy which taught that Christ's human body was an illusion.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 Jesus never raised the individual above the communal, nor the communal about the individual. The Holy Spirit creates consensus, not schism. Your individualistic, schismatic beliefs make you equate your own personal judgement with the judgement of the Holy Spirit. There are thousands of Protestant sects. This cannot be of the Spirit. They cannot all be right. The Church was united for 1400 years against heresy until Luther & co thought they knew better.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa The scripture does not create consensus of wrong doctrines. DOES NOT CREATE CONSENSUS OF WRONG DOCTRINES. These protestant sects as you call them were never allowed to start because people were afraid. Do you want to be afraid? Do you call that love? Say what you want about Martin Luther, But I DON'T RECALL THE POPE RUNNING AWAY FROM LUTHER SCARED FOR HIS LIFE. You are on Satan side. Change your ways.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write "These protestant sects ..were never allowed to start because people were afraid." Protestants were JUST AS BAD when they took over in northern Europe. That is history. Relying on scripture does indeed create a consensus of wrong doctrines. Either the Catholics & Orthodox consensus has been right from the start about eating the Flesh of Christ or the Protestant consensus has been right from the 16th century about denying it. Which consensus is of the Spirit?
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa YOU SAY WELL WHEN YOU SAY THE CHURCH WAS UNITED FOR 1400 YEARS AGAINST HERESY. YOU SAY WELL. FIRE TO BURN THE HERETICS WAS ONE METHOD. YOU ARE PREACHING ON THE SIDE OF SATAN. WAKE UP AND GIVE YOUR LIFE TO OUR LORD JESUS, NOT THE POPE.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 You write, "YOU ARE PREACHING ON THE SIDE OF SATAN." So when Protestants are burning Catholics as heretics, they WEREN'T preaching on the side of Satan? Catholic/Protestant state/mob murder is no indicator of whether the doctrine either of the Trinity or transubstantiation is from the Holy Spirit. The fact that Protestants burned people alive doesn't mean that believing in the Trinity was wrong. Likewise, transubstantiation was not wrong because of medieval brutality.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@nepistepa many peple called themselves protestans and they are not christian. But the crimes committed by the catholic church were committed by the catholic church. It's is black and white. There was even laws that were against people that didn't believe in transubstantiation. This law were enforced by kinks supported by the catholic church. THERE IS ONLY ONE CATHOLIC CHURCH. "you shall not kill" not so infallible to me.
medusa210562 1 week ago
@medusa210562 So drop the red herring about the rather obvious fact that Catholics and Protestants sanctioned murder on religious grounds. Christian belief in the Trinity and transubstantiation must be shown to be justified from other considerations. In the case of belief in eating the FLESH of Christ in the Eucharist, there is no historical proof that the Church has ever believed anything different. Jesus' words in St John's gospel themselves can be interpreted to refer to this.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@medusa210562 The proper question facing you is not how many people did Catholics & Protestants murder respectively, let's weigh it up. The proper question facing you is when was the Holy Spirit removed from the Church of God until the reformation so that she would fall into error. Was the Spirit removed from St John's pupils in the first Christian century? When the doctrine of the Trinity was finalised in the 4th century? After the last ecumenical council in the 9th?
nepistepa 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In St John's gospel, Jesus says, "the bread that I shall give is my FLESH", not "my SPIRIT" or "my faith". St John wrote this because he literally believed it. No one taught what you Protestants teach for 1400 YEARS. You seem to believe that God would remove his Holy Spirit from the disciples of St John & therefore from the whole Church for 1400 years until you Protestants came along, yet mysteriously leave it able to interpret & define the canon of Scripture & the Trinity.
nepistepa 1 week ago
@Nicklas07 I used to take Terrance Mckenna seriously too.
tetrahydroscope 1 month ago
@Nicklas07 lol
tetrahydroscope 1 month ago
This guy is a fake! Really? You think this quack is ordained in the true, apostolic Church? Its obvious this hillbilly is a protestant!
sbzombie69 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Father of who ? You are a fraud, sir !
SacredFractals 1 month ago
This guy is an idiot. The reason protestants have so many churches and so many denominations is that anyone can take the Bible and interpret it anyway they want and all of a sudden its the true interpretation of Gods Word! Whatever. They, nor any other church has claim to True Apostolic succesion except The Catholic Church. Read history. The Bible didnt even exist until the Catholic church put it together. Remember, the Bible is many books brought together. This idiot in this video is a quack!
sbzombie69 1 month ago
@sbzombie69 hes just stateing his opinion, he doesnt expect u to take it as a fact, if u choose not to believe it than dont, but some may call u crazy for not believing what hes saying, its a circle that we will continue to go around and around on,
tupac4life1989 1 month ago
Jesus speaks symbolically, (John 4:31-34 and Matt 16:5-12) and corrects their misunderstanding. Jesus speaks figuratively in John 6:52-56. The Jews interpret Him literally. Why would Jesus let them walk away if they misunderstood Him? The rest, well you know, the last supper, Matt 26:26-28. The devil's job is to keep you away from the Holy Eucharist, away from our Lord (John 6:66)
mrnonamesob10 2 months ago
As Christians we some to God and become his children by faith and acts of righteousness that springs from faith. By faith we eat the bread and drink the blood in remembrance of His death. Jesus body and blood are real spiritual food. We worship Jesus by faith. Faith is the only way to know and come to God. Either you trust God by faith or you do not. Eating bread in faith is the key to all of this. The bread and wine equates to Jesus body and blood that Jesus gave on the cross.
MRGV7373 2 months ago