You can disregard some of my posts, maybe it contain some mistakes. I have some guys here giving me problem. They want me to go out with them. Now, how do you see John Chapter 6?

@ebos,

I had John 6 quite in mind when I offered that the Bread and Wine is symbolic and not transubstantiation.

Of course, the crowd had thought that Jesus was speaking to them in a literal sense when He said "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you" (vs. 53). But it is clear all along that He was speaking in parabolic form from the earlier verses. Examples:

         "For the bread of God is HE which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world"  (vs. 33)

         "I am the bread of life" (vs. 35)

         "I am the bread which came down from heaven" (vs. 41)

         "I am that bread of life" (vs. 48)

         "I am the living bread which came down from heaven" (vs. 51)

Now it is clear that in all these texts He was speaking not in literal terms as if He was a loaf of bread wrapped up for the people to chew! This is the mistake that the Catholic Church makes - and Catholics find it so easy to believe, and yet are unable to grasp its meaning; nor will they apply the same rule of literal interpretation in other texts where the Lord spoke in parables about Himself!

The crowd got offended because they all thought He was speaking in literal sense. If He actually meant a literal sense of what He was speaking, it would simply mean that crowd was right that He was trying to make cannibals out of them! The ensuing event shows He was not speaking literarily, nor did He intend to make anyone a cannibal. But today, Catholics make the same mistake and wrap that mistake up in a sweet word called "transubstantiation". The Bible does not teach any such thing.

I've also asked you to take a closer look and if you must apply a literal sense in this wise, then you must also apply the same literal sense to the meaning that the Church is called ONE BREAD! You cannot apply partial rules in this issue, ebos - you must be willing to apply the very same rule you apply to any one of them!

Second, if Christ meant that He was the "bread" in a literal sense and that people should literarily eat His "flesh", you should also apply the same literal sense to these other figurative statements He made in the same John's Gospel:

 "I am the light of the world" (John 8:12 and 9:5)

 "I am the door of the sheep" (John 10:7)

 "I am the door" (John 10:9)

 "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman" (John 15:1)

 "I am the vine, ye are the branches" (John 15:5)

Was Jesus calling Himself all those things in a literal sense? If He was NOT, why would anyone suppose that He meant to call Himself "BREAD" in a literal sense, or ask people to eat His flesh in a literal sense? If you want to force this argument in isolation, it would only mean that you want to read cannibalism into John 6 when it is clear that the people listening to Him made that same mistake!

If you want to retain an isolated inference to force the Catholic mistake into that text for a transubstantiation that Scripture does not teach, then you would have to force the same literal inference to make the Church a loaf of bread according to 1 Cor. 10:17!! You can't afford to dribble half measures into the WORD and suppose that one man's mistake smarts it all. It just doesn't work that way!

Any verse that suite your point in the scripture, you take it literal, but when it fail to suit Protestants, you tell Catholics not accept it literal.

Jesus Christ made Himself clear in John Chapter 6, it is beyond human knowledge. This is the very reason, John Chapter has to be repeated in 1 Corinthians Chapter 11. Christ couldn’t be talking about symbolic bread when He said “anyone that eats His flesh and drink His blood will have life. Symbolic bread and wine cannot give you that life. That was why He made mention that the forefathers of the Israelites ate manna and were dead, but anyone that eat his body and drink His blood will abide in Him and Him in that person. Symbolic bread and wine cannot bring life hence there is no difference between symbolic bread and the manna which the Israelites ate and were dead. He distinguished His body and blood with that of manna.

Pilgrim, you too turn turn points to find your way out

ebos:

In 1 Corinthians Chapter 11:23-31, Christ blessed the bread and wine and it became His Real Body and Blood and He broke the bread and gave it to His disciples and said “Take, eat, this is My body which is broken for you, do this in remembrance of Me.” Again, He took the cup after super, saying, “This cup is the new Covenant in My blood, drink it often in remembrance of Me.” Just read 1 Corinthians Chapter 11 and John Chapter 6 well. Anyway 1 Corinthians Chapter 11 carries curse that is why Protestant founders cannot call it the real Body and Blood of Jesus to avoid God’s wrath. They know what they are doing.

@ebos,

If you carefully study this subject in the epistles, you'd see again that rather than confirm your views, then actually went right against it, especially because they did not try to teach "transubstantiation" at any level.

Before you come to chapter 11 of 1 Corinthians, let's see what the apostle said elsewhere - in chapter 10:

1 Cor. 10:16 & 17

       "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?
       The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being
       many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread."

Two things here:

  (a) the apostle was careful to demonstrate that the eating of the Bread and the drinking of the Cup are simply the COMMUNION of both the Body and the Blood of Jesus. He does not mean to say that we eat His literal flesh and drink His lietral blood! The emphasis there is that it is a communion - a fellowship with the Lord through the Bread and the Cup.

 (b) after making his point, the end of verse 17 shows again that the apostle saw the elements simply as BREAD when he said "partakers of that one bread"! This alone should make you understand that the apostles did not see a "transubstantiation" that tends to make people reason about whether Christians celebrate a cannibalistic feast!

If you take the time to go through the texts, it becomes clear that the Lord meant the bread and the cup to signify something - the victory of His sacrificial death. It is not transubstantiation in any way. To read it as transubstantiation, you MUST apply the same rules in John's Gospel and 1 Corinthians to speak of literal bread and vine and door!

ebos:

Any verse that suite your point in the scripture, you take it literal, but when it fail to suit Protestants, you tell Catholics not accept it literal.

Where the Lord meant something to be taken literally, He was explicit in His statements. If He did not mean for us to apply a literal interpretation in what He said, He was as well clear. There is no reason for the idea that Protestants do this or that. Rather than make such suppositions, look into the Bible and explain it as clearly as could be understood without the usual Catholic inferences that have no Scriptural bearings.

ebos:

Jesus Christ made Himself clear in John Chapter 6, it is beyond human knowledge. This is the very reason, John Chapter has to be repeated in 1 Corinthians Chapter 11. Christ couldn’t be talking about symbolic bread when He said “anyone that eats His flesh and drink His blood will have life. Symbolic bread and wine cannot give you that life. That was why He made mention that the forefathers of the Israelites ate manna and were dead, but anyone that eat his body and drink His blood will abide in Him and Him in that person. Symbolic bread and wine cannot bring life hence there is no difference between symbolic bread and the manna which the Israelites ate and were dead. He distinguished His body and blood with that of manna.

The weakness in your summations is that: (a) The Lord did not teach anywhere that Himself as "the Bread from Heaven" was a literal thing, while the manna was symbolic! (b) again, the Lord did not teach that eating bread of "transubstantiation" gave anyone life!

Let's not deceive ourselves on this, ebos. If the bread given to you in communion service actually becomes "flesh", you should be able to see it in your hand and taste it in your mouth that it is actually FLESH! You cannot be tasting bread or wafer in your mouth and pretending it tastes like "flesh"! Talk true, ebos. . . na flesh ou dey chew when you eat communion? Haba!!

ebos:

Pilgrim, you too turn turn points to find your way out

I no dey turn nothing! Just make am "literal" and we go see if na true say you dey chew "flesh" at the communion table!

Na flesh me I dey chew, confirmed flesh of Jesus. Come to Catholic and taste it with us. There are many miracles associated with it in the Catholic Church where the Eucharist (communion) turned to blood.

It will be nice to know your own Church Pilgrim, I want to know the NAME of your church. You know me as a Catholic, so, forget being a local church. What I need is the NAME and nothing more. This time, don’t go round the point. – the name of your church is the only answer I want. It will help me channel my questions.

Pilgrim, you are turning all my questions upside down just to wriggle yourself out. You are so smart when it comes to that.

ebos:

Na flesh me I dey chew, confirmed flesh of Jesus. Come to Catholic and taste it with us. There are many miracles associated with it in the Catholic Church where the Eucharist (communion) turned to blood.

Lol. . . ebos! Do you have to be so grandiose like that? No make people believe say na actual red blood una dey drink for Catholic Church O!

ebos:

It will be nice to know your own Church Pilgrim, I want to know the NAME of your church. You know me as a Catholic, so, forget being a local church. What I need is the NAME and nothing more. This time, don’t go round the point. – the name of your church is the only answer I want. It will help me channel my questions.

I'm a Protestant! Abi that one never do?

No, I'm not going round the point - but place me anywhere, it's okay by me if you know me as a Protestant proper!

ebos:

Pilgrim, you are turning all my questions upside down just to wriggle yourself out. You are so smart when it comes to that.

Lol, I'm not deliberately doing so. The one thing I would have expected of you in return is to turn all my answers upside down as smartly as you possibly could manage!

@locoman,
I see u r being true to ur name cos d only way i can wrap my brain around ur rude, offensive, silly topic is by imagining dat u've gone 'LOCO'.
wotda F?
Dunno y pple r so fasinated with d Catholic Church, if u don't like d way we do our thing, turn d other way. U'd neva see a catholic blasting anoda religion cos it's so unnecessary, in d final analysis, getting to heaven's all dat really matters, ur personal rtnship with God is all dat counts. So if u like ehn, hide under the umbrella of 'holier dan thou, perfect pentecostal church' or watever, don't start focusing on ur rtnship wiv God u hear.
If i choose to bow down, lie down or "throw backdive" in front of Mary's statue, how does it affect anyone?
We have an open door policy. U r welcome anytime and also free to leave if u so please.

Personal relationship with God, How?

wot do u mean 'personal relationship with God , how?'
No b english i dey speak so? hp u r not one of those pple dat post in threads just because.
Ok, lemme break it down
d way you communicate with God, ur everyday dealings with Him. Ultimately, dat's wot matters.

newness99:

@locoman,
I see you're being true to your name because d only way i can wrap my brain around your rude, offensive, silly topic is by imagining that u've gone 'LOCO'.

Catholics typically see others as 'rude, offensive, silly' but never take the time to look closer at the same things coming from their quarters.

newness99:

You'd never see a catholic blasting another religion because it's so unnecessary,

Not true. What then did the Pope mean by "Other Christians not true churches"? Is that the way to dialogue with "other Christians"?

@newness99

From the way you speak i can see that you are not even a faithful Catholic, We have been very polite with ourselves all along Ebos and I-man have been defending the Catholic faith without using any abusive word. But you can from nowhere with abusive words against my name.

It is true in Spanish LOCO mean crazy, But thank God that in my language it means "God is my Hiding place". You see how wrong you are? You better repent.

Pilgrim, you have come again. I know you are a Protestant but e no dey enough for me at all. Mention the name of your Church. Wetin come dey difficult there? Abi, your church be one of these……? Pilgrim, just tell me the name of your Church. How can I be debating a thread with you and cannot know your denomination? Haba! Are you not proud of your Church? To know your Church matters to me. So, tell me.

ebos:

Pilgrim, you have come again. I know you are a Protestant but e no dey enough for me at all. Mention the name of your Church. Wetin come dey difficult there? Abi, your church be one of these……? Pilgrim, just tell me the name of your Church. How can I be debating a thread with you and cannot know your denomination? Haba! Are you not proud of your Church? To know your Church matters to me. So, tell me.

@ebos
He has told you that he is a protestant what other name do you want? you are a catholic we don't know whether charismatic or not. in christainity we have penticostal,protestant,catholic,methodist,anglican,etc. so what other denomination do you want. All this mentality of being proud of ones church is really, i don't know. For God's sake we are one body in christ. Okay! i remember!! God said "MY PEOPLE PERISH FOR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE''

bigfred:

@ebos
He has told you that he is a protestant what other name do you want? you are a catholic we don't know whether charismatic or not. in christainity we have penticostal,protestant,catholic,methodist,anglican,etc. so what other denomination do you want. All this mentality of being proud of ones church is really,  i don't know. For God's sake we are one body in christ. Okay! i remember!! God said "MY PEOPLE PERISH FOR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE''

Methodists and Anglicans are part of  Protestantism.

@Ebos

im no want talk her church.Shame dey catch am   

@Bigfred
We have only one Catholic. Charismatic is a society in Catholic Church while Watchman Charismatic is not known as Catholic. Protestants Churches quarrel among themselves because they differ in so many things. So, telling me you are a Protestant is not a enough. Nobody has said we are two bodies rather we slightly differ with our teachings. I can now see why our people are destroyed for lack of knowledge, yet they believe they have knowledge.

Again, I want to know the name of Pilgrim’s Church.

I-man, I guess she might not be proud of her church but I don’t know if I guessed it right.

Not true. What then did the Pope mean by "Other Christians not true churches"? Is that the way to dialogue with "other Christians"?

You only have to go though NL to find historically,how many threads were started to rant about Catholicism.Compare that to how many were started by Catholics to rant about Protestantism or Pentecostalism.You won't find me on a Protestant thread questioning their beliefs or history

ebos:

@Bigfred
We have only one Catholic. Charismatic is a society in Catholic Church while Watchman Charismatic is not known as Catholic. Protestants Churches quarrel among themselves because they differ in so many things. So, telling me you are a Protestant is not a enough. Nobody has said we are two bodies rather we slightly differ with our teachings. I can now see why our people are destroyed for lack of knowledge, yet they believe they have knowledge.

Again, I want to know the name of Pilgrim’s Church.

I-man, I guess she might not be proud of her church but I don’t know if I guessed it right.

Iam not interested in any arguement about church, i contributed when you were so much interested in knowing the name of his church. You said we slightly differ in teaching WHY? are we not using the same bible? what can we do to remove this diffrence? most (if not all) churches has its origin from catholic, what is catholic doing wrong that made others leave them? These are the area iam interested in not the name of church hope iam cleared?

@locoman,

i read through all the post on this topic and some really did got me shaking my head.
Maybe you have had questionable experience of the old ways of Catholicism, , but i will say this, i dont know wat church dat was or is, but the catholic church i go to is a true worshipper of the doctrin of Christ. Yes, not all catholics read the bible, not all can speak in tongues, not all can quote verse or pray on top of their lungs for hours, , but every one of them know the importance of communion.

the same communion some protestant churches condenm is now being practiced in practically all protestant church , dat have come to appreciate the symbolism of communion. I am not just writing to fill spaces, i have being to other protestant churches, not to join them, but to worship with them, and believe me, i can write epistle of all the things being done wrong.

Catholics today are being strongly encouraged to read the bible constantly and attend bible study programmes in church and community worship ( if that what you feel we dont do ) as for the status and images, they are just monuments and acts like pictures just to tell congregations who these people (saints and apostles)were in their days, just like you have pictures in your house, it does not mean you worship your grandmother's picture!
The crucifics is the symbol of the pain and shame i made my Lord go through for everytime i sinned, and even though dying on the cross is a shameful death, Jesus turned it around and his death on the cross symbolises salvation and Grace to all man kind.

if some parishioners decide to take it to another level by sacrificing animals before them (which i doubt they do), then its them and God that have a say in the matter, you have no right to Judge!!!!!!!!

Fine you can admonish and let them know your views, but you absolutely have no write to stigmatize!
i thought the message of Christians ( or so called christians ) is love and peace, but have you ever stop to think that the essence of peace is accepting what is unique about you, ur religion, and respecting what is unique about teh next person or their relogion and believe,

,
You can not forcefully convert an herbalist to see reason why he should drop his ways and serve the true and living God, dat will cause war!
But if you come in contact with one, you engage him in polite talk of what is common about both of you( like the weather, the economy etc) make him a friend on a general level, then you get to know his believe nas reason for him being who he is , and you also share yours and give hime reasons for being who you are, and if you character speak for you, an dyou show him genuine love of christ, he would not be able to resist a conversion to christ, becos your attitude and charcter speak for you.


I read in an almanac that the late Mahatma Ghandi said " Jesus Christ in Knows about and respect, but his so called followers ( christians) he does not"
why because , they are only followers in word of mouth and not doings!
i have being to a protestant churches were Congregation worship their pastures more than what brought them together.
i have gone to a service where the congregation could no longer sing the praises because there was a power failure and no light topower the bands.
i have been to a protestant church were the pastures were carrying on about posperity and wealth and health, and forgot to chip in that even Christ said if you want to be my follower you have to carry ur cross and follow me( do people know teh literary meaning of the word"Cross". Even Jesus Christ was tempted by the Devil himself, why wunt we? Even Job went through hell, why wunt God's sincere followers?

God admonishes those he loves and calls his son/ daughter!he also chooses to bless who he wishes.

Modern Roman Catholic Churhes do not worship idols, we worship the true living Almighty God, we reference His son; our lord Jesus Christ and comforter; the Holy Spirit, and honour The Blessed Vigin Mother of Jesus Christ, because of all being created by God, she was the most blessed and favoured for God's plan for mankind.

Satan has a way of fighting any right cause. Our brothers and sisters in Protestants have been deceived by the so-called founders of their churches. This is exactly what Satan wants. So, the only way Satan wants to prove Christ wrong is to use human beings who disguised themselves as men of God to pull down Catholic Church – and once this is done Christ words that the gate of Hell cannot prevail against His Church is defeated. But I know Catholic Church will continue to remain firm, in spite of all unnecessary attacks against her. You see so many people who were deceived and as a result left Catholic Church have continued to find their way back to Catholic on daily basis. No matter anything, Catholic cannot derail and we understand Satan’s tricks to get the Church out of track.

It is rare for Catholic to initiate any attack against other Churches but Protestant Churches are mostly known for attacking Catholic Church. My friends (Pilgrim) in Protestants, please let’s embrace each other.

@Bigfred,

So many Churches left because of greed. If Catholic is the problem, why do we have over 10,000 Churches today? I think we should have 2 to 3 Churches – either you believe in Catholic teaching or you believe in one Protestant Church teaching ((Catholic or one Protestant, not more than one). You can see why I said Protestants still fight among themselves when they are denied the largest share of the money.

Catholics have continued to reemphasize that they don’t worship idols, but outsiders keep on saying no, you people are worshipping idols. If you worship idols, how can you deny it? Haba! You see images and condemn it, any picture of Christ you see somewhere, you have the intuition that the picture is Jesus. Any difference?

Ok. ebos, lets assume you do not worship idols, what do you usually inquire of Mary or what does Mary do for you or what do you do to Mary . We need this to put an end to this confusion.

Holy Mary pray for us, and you say Heh, pastor pray for me. Anything difference? The prayer of the righteous is powerful before God. Have you not heard it?

yuor prayer has been answered.

In Jesus Name - Amen! Catholic great.

ebos, are u sure thats all? If not, please tell us more. Also, what about the physical images of Mary especially, is there any ablution, devotion that is done to it? B sincere as a faithful catholic so that we know what we are discussing about. Many thanks for your sincerity.

LIGHT MYSTERIES FIRST and its Bible backings

These are the mysteries we meditate as we recite the rosary. Please go to 4 and read everything you want. I believe I have all ready stated it. Go back to the thread.

b]1. The Baptism in the Jordan [/b]
And a voice came from the heavens, saying, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased." (Mt. 3:17)

2. The Wedding at Cana
"Women, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come." His mother said to the servers, "Do whatever he tells you." (Jn 2:1-12)

3[b]. The Proclamation of the Kingdom of God [/b]
"This is the time of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel." (Mk 1:15)

4. The Transfiguration
While he was praying his face changed in appearance and his clothing became dazzling white. (Lk9:29)

5. The Institution of the Eucharist
Before the feast of Passover, Jesus knew that his hour had come to pass from this world to the Father. He loved his own in the world and he loved them to the end. (Jn 13:1)

After everything, would you join Catholics to give Mary Honour she truly deserve?

@ebos

You funny oh, how does what you just quoted concern Mary ? When Mary wanted to command his son to produce wine Jesus said to her "woman" what have I to do with you ? He did not say "Mama"

hmmmmmm

I-man:

Methodists and Anglicans are part of  Protestantism.

@Ebos

im no want talk her church.Shame dey catch am   

Lol. . . shé 'Protestant' no do una? No be Catholic and Protestant we do discuss for her? Okay, if you place me anywhere in Protestant, no wahala! Shame no catch me at all.