Eucharist Debate With ZKueker88 -My Response

Refutation of Zkueker88's video "Disproving Transubstantiation/Eucharist". This is my first of three videos in this debate on the Eucharist

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Eucharist
• Jesus
• Christ
• Scripture
• Bible
• Sacrifice
• Lord's
• Supper
• Mass
• Catholic
• Zkueker88
• Transubstantiation
• real
• presence

[KabaneTheChristian]

You crushed him. Absolutely crushed him. While I can tolerate those Protestants who will respectfully argue about the real presence, I cannot stand when they blaspheme the body and blood of God by calling the real presence doctrine "paganism".

[OneTrueChurch]

thanks, btw. there was never any debate. Zach just read off of an article by matt slick and then refused to respond to this rebuttle. But it jsut shows that zach is not interested in the truth

[coolbrian15]

I just got baptized as catholic after attending rcia im a catholic now i feel holy

[medusa210562]

there is no cannibal in the bible, AND IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR OUR SALVATION. We must truly eat his flash and drink his blood, truly accept his sacrifice. transubstantiation is not biblical

[jfreakbol]

I still believe it to be symbolic, but putting that aside, I'm not understanding why Catholic mass is so centered around the Eucharist. It seems to be the main part. Why is it made to be so important? And what does eating Christ's body and drinking His blood do for us anyway? Does it make us a better person? Does it forgive our sins? If Christ already died for us, why do we need to keep "eating him" again? 

[skoobalon]

The words design a spiritual eating of Christ by faith. To eat the flesh, and drink the blood of Christ, is to believe that Christ is come in the flesh, and is truly and really man; that his flesh is given for the life of his people, and his blood is shed for their sins, and this with some view and application to themselves.

If you want to crucify the Son of God afresh with every Mass, with the Priest's filthy hands holding the chalice high in idolatrous worship, feel free.

I ain't stoppin ya.

[skoobalon]

u sound mad.

This debate is silly

[YeshuaisYahweh1]

@ChristianEastern Yeah, they love ML more than the Blessed Virgin or the saints or prophets, they put him up there with Moses and Abraham. Also, I heard that Luther could not stand the term "Lutheran". Lutheranism is more close to the Catholic Faith then most fundimentalists churches now a days. And Luther never believed in symbolic baptism or all that crap.

[ChristianEastern]

@thinkerj

Read John 6. Many walked away from the hard teaching. Do not be deceived by the sweet but Satanic lie that it is purely symbolic and not at all literal. Many in the Baptist and Calvinist camps have fallen for this humanistic lie.

[ChristianEastern]

The interesting thing is that Martin Luther definitely still believed in the RP after his split. Funny how some of the Protestants who have made an idol of him claim to hate the RP.

[MrHarshusa2001]

@ltrox1 Look at it this way if all you ever know is vanilla ice cream that fine it tastes good but unfortunately you are missing out on the awesomeness of chocolate ice cream with hot fudge! =)

[angeltita24]

That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him,

the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints (Ephesians 1:17,18).

I used to be catholic.. Let me say that it is more than this re sacrifice that is so disrespectful but the beleif that you have to go through the pope to understand the scrip

[321boileranimal]

I love faygo,

[321boileranimal]

Zkueker are you a White National Socialist???? 88? 88? 88? 88? 88?

I am guessing he knows all 14 words.

[FRANKENLUT]

You are wrong. Go to a Catholic Mass and you will see that in most cases both species are used!

[FRANKENLUT]

zkeuker88 is a coward because he does not receive comments. he is afraid he will be proven wrong. By the way where was his christian church throughout the ages? Most of the people who call themselves "christians" did not worship until recently. they picked up a Bible and established their own church. The Bible that every christian of all denominations is an edited version of what Catholics use.

[CHECKrayrobionson]

@johnthien1 they do. I went to mass

[johnthien1]

Anyway, the catholic only give the body to eat, but no drink. The drink is the blood of Jesus. We save by the blood not by body alone. SO Catholic Still not doing it full. It shall have a better way to do it.

[backwoodsninja]

I think that's my main issue with Zkueker. He states his Calvinist interpretation of Scripture and then considers the case closed. He is not open to debate.

[bananymous1]

YOU ROCK DUDE! Keep defending the one true church. way to be.

[ysterion]

Excellent abbreviated apologetic. I am grateful for this resource you created. Thank you very much.

[DarknessAndRage]

"Trogo" = crunch between the teeth.

[OneTrueChurch]

no it is not eiegesis. Especially when you read it in conjucntion with the last supper, it is obviously talking about the eucharist. Also take into account that the apostle john does not give us an institution narrative as the other 3 gospel writers do. John 6, is in the place of this

[OneTrueChurch]

because it means to chew or to gnaw. There is nowhere ins cripture where it is used metophorically

[thinkerj]

The video makes a hilarious and unsubstantiated statement. It claims that "phago" can have a symbolic meaning, but not the more concrete verb "trogo". Why is that so? Can you provide any reference to an NT scholar explaining how it is impossible for "trogo" to carry a symbolic meaning?

[thinkerj]

Yes, why not? There is nothing in the context suggesting that Jesus is discussing the Eucharist. In fact, a Eucharistic interpretation is clearly eisegesis. To eat and drink his body and blood is to receive his sacrifice by faith. Using figurative speech he prepares his disciples for his sacrificial death. In the gospel of John it is stressed over and over again that we are saved by faith in Christ.

[JosherForder]

Actually, it is only when one misunderstands the meaning of the Greek text, does such a one wrongfully, see it as proving the trinity doctrine when in such a matter it really is not do so in any way whatsoever.