Transubstantiation as it's taught by Vatican is Rhetoric!
Uploader Comments (christianstudents)
Top Comments
-
I believe I have come to crux of the matter. if you are an atheist, why do you spend so much time arguing against something that does not exist. Such a waste of time. Prove to me that God does not exist? if he does not, why continue even posting here. Go watch a baseball game or something.
Video Responses
All Comments (375)
-
In the year 1087 AD Pope Victor 3rd was poisoned while serving Mass its the funniest example of the false doctrine of Transubstantiation on record Pope Victor Consecrated the Chalice & the host so according to Papal dogma the bread and wine are no longer bread & wine but the body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, after he consecrated the Chalice he drank it and dropped down dead POISONED so obviously the poison in the wine did not change like RCs were led to believe this religion is a hoax.
-
Ignatius wasnt an apostle. In his letter to the Ephesians he admits hes not an apostle. So that begs the question...Why was he writing to the Ephesians? lol
And no Ignatius wasnt a student of John the Apostle. The Apostles didnt have students. All the ones who claim to have been 'students' are NEVER mentioned in any of the Scriptures. All the ones who are mentioned in the Bible are never mentioned by the 'catholic church'
The Catholic Church is ALL nonsense.
-
Transubstantiation is pagan in its origin...Aquinas adopted it from Aristotle..the RCC even denounced it for a period of time before re-establishing it.
-
@modomnoc1 "If we take this a step further following this logic, If one can't see God, therefore He does not exist."
God does not claim to have been transformed into something that we can see therefore your example is not even close to following his logic. If the bread and wine are literally changed only not in appearance then they yet would have the texture and taste of flesh and blood.
-
@christianstudents Excellent video!
-
If we take this a step further following this logic, If one can't see God, therefore He does not exist. I'm presuming this person is an Atheist since he only believes in materialistic explanations. In truth explaining the real presence in the eucharist is difficult and no explanation even transubstantiation does it justice, just as trying to explain the Trinity seems illogical. If this guy is a fundamentalist then I will under his simple nature of explaining things to the already converted.
-
Transubstantiation is silly for various reasons, but it's amusing when Christians who aren't adherents of it ridicule it because its claim doesn't match the empirical evidence. Your holy book says that anyone "in Christ...is a new creation," that "the old is gone, the new has come" (2 Cor 5:17). Look at a person the day before and the day after she converts to Christianity: no visible difference. But I bet you believe the invisible change (the "new creation") is as real as anything you can see.
-
You must have never even heard of metaphysics...
Ignatius of Antioch, who studied under John, and knew the apostles, said:
"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ, and see how contrary their opinions are to God: they abstain from the Eucharist because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes."
I would tend to imagine that the guy knows what he is talking about.
wilburh87 3 years ago 3
Ignatious was not a very Good student.
Where in the Bible each city has several bishops, he emphasized one per city.
I do not believe him to be an apostole.
christianstudents 3 years ago