Is Christ's Presence IN the Sacraments at Communion?

[donadams]

Who were the apostles present when He said that? The "them" in that passage?

You’ll find it in matt 10:2

 

[donadams]

Where else would it be and be of God? His truth.

His church! Matt 28:19 Lk 10:16 Matt 18:17 1 Tim 3:15

 

[Arial]

It is Christ and he commanded it!
It requires a ministerial priesthood also

(In regards to the Communion ceremony)

Where does the Bible say it requires a ministerial priesthood?

Where does it say it must be in scripture?

Where does it say “all truths revealed by God are in scripture”?

His church! Matt 28:19 Lk 10:16 Matt 18:17 1 Tim 3:15

First you say it does not have to be in scripture. Then say it is in His church and not in Scripture, and then give Scripture to prove it. So when you say church, tell us exactly what you mean every time you use the word "church". And then we can circle back to the question that has been asked over and over and over, and never answered. Using your one and only definition of "church" where does the authority to do so come from? Who give this "church" according to you, the authority to define itself as the only, and the authority on interpreting the Bible in the only correct way? WHo/what are the witnesses to this other than itself?

 

[Arial]

You’ll find it in matt 10:2

Right. But aren't you also claiming that there is a succession of apostles and the Catholic church are them?

 

[Arial]

Jn 6:50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

53 Then Jesus said unto them, 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.

54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

Let me ask you this. Would Jesus in agreement with the Father prohibit drinking blood and at the same time tell us to drink it? Even Paul prohibited it for the Gentiles also and we know that Paul was in agreement with Jesus. So if in the Eucharist the wine becomes blood, are you not drinking blood? And if you acknowledge that what Jesus said in John 6 is not literal but metaphor, why in the Eucharist must it become literal? What do you think Jesus actually meant in John 6?

 

[Mikeuk]

It RESOUNDINGLY IS the flesh of Christ. No doubt about it.

I will argue from three directions.

1/ All of the posts I see denying it prooftexting this and that, in true protestant myopic fashion, have failed to take into account the backdrop scripture and the fundamental principle of the fulfillment of the old testament in the new.

There is so much of this scripture it is beyond doubt.
Start with Abraham being asked to sacrifice his own son as a sacrifice. Till God provided another..
Burnt offerings in the new testament were eaten.


The eucharist is the fulfillment of the passover sacrifice.
Where a spotless lamb is sacrificed by under the auspices of a PRIEST and physically EATEN.
It prefigured the eucharist in the new testament
Christ is described as the lamb
Christ offered himself as the lamb of the new passover.
The bitter cup on the cross, was the fourth cup of the passover.

And all the symbology.
Bethlehem means "house of bread"
Jesus was born in an EATING trough!
How much more could God do, to tell you what he meant. It seems many of you ignore it all.

Jesus says "this IS My body " this "IS my blood" . He does not say symbol. The word used for eat means "gnaw" as of meat not consume.
He is the lamb to be eaten.
etc etc

Then authority.
2/ In the early church the faith was HANDED down, the meaning of the word tradition by "word of mouth and letter" by those SENT to teach. Only they can preach so scripture tells us.

The mere fact this thread is here shows there is room to argue on interpretation of scripture because all of you disagree on it. It is why protestantism fractured into 10000 bits.

If you want to know what the early church and true church believed the history is there in clarity.
The early fathers write a lot on the eucharist.

Sure - early fathers are not inspired - they can go off on tangents - but when they all say the same , with no dissenters it is clearly a record of what the early church believed and did. That is tradition . Handing down the true faith
They say it really is the flesh of Jesus! Whether or not orthodox disagree with Catholics is deep philosophy - but their liturgy uses Justin Martyrs phrase "flesh"

Polycarp and ignatius got their doctrine from john the apostle who wrote John 6. SO they know what it means.

All of them are united. The eucharist IS the real body of jesus - the flesh of Jesus. valid ONLY if presided by a BISHOP in succession.
So that is what Jesus church did. And it is saying the same at the councils all the way to today.

These fathers are united on the decisions of the succession - the true church in council - resolving doctrinal disputes with the power to bind and loose. Even the content of the bible itself is a decision of the church in council..

Only those SENT can preach. THe succession. So who is it calling it symbolic, what authority do they have except their own personal opinion in contradiction of the faith handed down and the old testament forerunner.

It is the flesh of Jesus because the appointed church says so. YOu do not get to chose what scripture means. Tradition and authority tell you.


3 Then the historical back drop.
From the Romans who thought christians were cannibals because of what they believed the eucharist was!!!!
TO the eucharistic miracles in which forensic tests says it really is living heart tissue, when Jesus allows himeslef to be seen.


I became a catholic because protestants profane the true eucharist.
Only after the reformation did anyone seriously doubt it, when they put their own intellect over the teaching of those who were sent.

 

[Arial]

The eucharist is the fulfillment of the passover sacrifice.
Where a spotless lamb is sacrificed by under the auspices of a PRIEST and physically EATEN.

It was not human flesh. Eating human flesh is prohibited by God. It was temporary and did not provide eternal life or a change of conscience.

Jesus says "this IS My body " this "IS my blood" . He does not say symbol.

ANd then He says, "Do this in remembrance of me." And He is not crucified thousands of times every day for 2000 plus years. The reason the Jews thought what He was saying about eating His flesh and drinking His blood was so abhorrent is because they were taking it literally. And He told them the reason they could not understand Him was because they did not belong to Him.

Bethlehem means "house of bread"

That is where the true bread, the bread of life was born, as opposed to the manna that gave no one spiritual live, raised no one from the dead.

Jesus was born in an EATING trough!

That is in no way related to the Eucharist, but rather a lowly birth---not the typical birthplace of a king. Which the Jews thought the Messiah would be.

The word used for eat means "gnaw" as of meat not consume.
He is the lamb to be eaten.

Make up your mind. Was the Passover lamb only gnawed on or was it consumed i.e. eaten?

2/ In the early church the faith was HANDED down, the meaning of the word tradition by "word of mouth and letter" by those SENT to teach. Only they can preach so scripture tells us.

Scripture does not tell us that. If it did we would not find false teachers even appearing within the pages of the Bible, the letters, in which the apostles in their letters dealt with. Jesus would not have told us to beware of wolves in sheeps clothing. Paul would not have warned that false teachers would be in our very midst. Whether they were sent or not usually is determined by the hearer and measured by what the hearer wants to believe. When really it should be measured by its consistency with what the word of God tells us, and the appointing of the apostles in the Bible by Jesus. They had to have been with Christ while He was here on earth, and must have witnessed His death and the risen Jesus, or in Paul's case, have a direct encounter with Jesus after His resurrection---and only in Paul's case. It is their writings that are the authority, no matter what various men say (and they did say various things. They were not consistent as you make it appear. You simply pick and choose what suits you, and then present those persons as the authority. You are determining who the sent are and you have determined they only belong to the Catholic religion. Catholicism is a religion and a denomination, just as are Protestant denominations. The RCC determines that it alone is Christ's church and all the authority they pull from the scriptures to do so is confirmation bias, that falls back onto its own and only witness of itself.

Sure - early fathers are not inspired - they can go off on tangents - but when they all say the same , with no dissenters it is clearly a record of what the early church believed and did. That is tradition . Handing down the true faith
They say it really is the flesh of Jesus! Whether or not orthodox disagree with Catholics is deep philosophy - but their liturgy uses Justin Martyrs phrase "flesh"

Not all the ECF agreed and you know that I am sure, yet act like it is fact that they did. They do not all say the same. And when you look at the history of the RCC and the corruption that was in it (and still is)---before we even get to the doctrines that defy the Christology and soteriology within the Scriptures-----how can you dare declare that the Catholic denomination is the one and only true church of Christ! So perhaps the ones who were sent, not as apostles, and priests, and popes, but as teachers, were the Reformers. Who were Catholic btw, and tried to reform the Catholic church from within. Maybe they were the sent ones that Catholicism would have none of and cast them out. It is from within your religion and structure that Protestantism was birthed.

TO the eucharistic miracles in which forensic tests says it really is living heart tissue, when Jesus allows himeslef to be seen.

Is that hearsay or can you provide actually proof with evidence?

Only after the reformation did anyone seriously doubt it, when they put their own intellect over the teaching of those who were sent.

That is an absolutely false statement. And one you cannot even verify was true in the apostles teaching. Where within the scriptures, when any of the apostles after the ascension when speaking of the Last Supper, ever provide a teaching on the elements being transformed into Christ's literal flesh and blood? When Paul is chastising those at Corinth for the way they partook of this communion, it appears more as a shared meal than anything else.

 

[donadams]

(In regards to the Communion ceremony)





First you say it does not have to be in scripture. Then say it is in His church and not in Scripture, and then give Scripture to prove it. So when you say church, tell us exactly what you mean every time you use the word "church". And then we can circle back to the question that has been asked over and over and over, and never answered. Using your one and only definition of "church" where does the authority to do so come from? Who give this "church" according to you, the authority to define itself as the only, and the authority on interpreting the Bible in the only correct way? WHo/what are the witnesses to this other than itself?

Some but not all of God’s truth is in scripture and I use it for your sake, cos you believe the five solas!

The universal apostolic church

Christ established the church and endowed it with his authority Matt 16:18-19 Matt 28:20 Jn 16:13 & 20:21 Matt 18:17 1 Tim 3:15

 

[donadams]

Right. But aren't you also claiming that there is a succession of apostles and the Catholic church are them?

Acts 1:15-26
Acts 2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, what eleven? Judas is dead, Paul not apostle yet? Mathias is the authentic successor of Judas!

Moses had a successor in Joshua and those in Matt 23:1 and Christ commanded obedience to them and thier authority was taken from them Matt 21:43 and given to Peter and the apostles Matt 16:18-19 & 18:18 and their successors must be obeyed!

Apostolic succession!

The nations still need to be taught, disciples still need to be baptized and the church the new covenant kingdom of christ still needs to be governed!

Hebrews 3:1
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Christ is an apostle, and has authority to send other apostles, the apostles also have this authority, so the apostles continue down thru the centuries as Christ promised! Matt 28:19-20

Keys of jurisdictional authority! Open and shut And power to bind and loose! Matt 16:18 and Matt 18:18 matt 28:19 Isa 22:21-22

Moral authority:
(Teaching)
Necessity of being taught by Christ:
Two edge sword: defining truth and condemning errors, and Interpreting scripture.

Jurisdictional authority:
(Governing / administering)
Necessity of Peter and the apostles and their successors to govern the holy church.

Spiritual authority:
(Life of Grace)
Sanctifying thru the mass and Sacraments for the forgiveness of sin.


The apostles teaching is Christ’s teaching, Christ and His church are one! Acts 9:4 eph 5:32 Jn 15:5 eph 5:24

Thks

 

[Arial]

Acts 1:15-26
Acts 2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, what eleven? Judas is dead, Paul not apostle yet? Mathias is the authentic successor of Judas!

Acts 1:15-26 is not apostolic succession but a completion of a number. There were to be 12. Twelve tribes, twelve apostles, twelve, twelve unleavened cakes of bread to be placed every week in the temple, twelve gates in the New Jerusalem. The walls 12 multiplied by itself (144,000 cubits high) the city 12,000 furlongs square. etc. etc. The number twelve in one of the foundations of Scripture. It is recorded 189 times in the KJV. Put into the context of where it appears it symbolizes God's power and authority, as well as serving as a perfect governmental foundation.

What those verses do give us is the qualifications of an apostle. 21. So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us---one of these men must become with us a witness to His resurrection.

Acts 2:14-15 But Peter, standing with the eleven,lifted up his voice and addressed them:"Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you and give ear to my words. For these people are not drunk, as ou suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day.
That has nothing to do with apostolic succession! It is dealing with the accusation made by the languages being spoken that they did not understand.

Moses had a successor in Joshua and those in Matt 23:1 and Christ commanded obedience to them and thier authority was taken from them Matt 21:43 and given to Peter and the apostles Matt 16:18-19 & 18:18 and their successors must be obeyed!

Apostolic succession!

Joshua replaced Moses in taking the Israelites into the Promised Land because God prohibited Moses from entering. And that had to do with taking possession of that land, not apostolic succession. They were not apostles in the same sense as the twelve disciples of Jesus. The seat of Moses is in reference to the Law that came through Moses, and the Scribes and Pharisees being teachers and authority of that Law.

Matt 21:43 Goes with the parables that Jesus spoke before verse 43. They thought they possessed the kingdom of God by virtue of their own righteousness and by virtue of being of Israel. Israel was a kingdom of God on earth exclusively of all other nations in the sense that He was their King. It's being taken away from them means that it will be in all nations through Christ and faith in Him.

It has nothing to do with apostolic succession. And even if it were true, which it is not, we come right back to what has yet to be answered. Who anointed the RCC as that successor?

The nations still need to be taught, disciples still need to be baptized and the church the new covenant kingdom of christ still needs to be governed!

And those things are done by the people of God, except for the government of the Kingdom of God, which is obviously done by God Himself. And once again you present your argument with a logical fallacy when you use the word "church" to always and everywhere mean the RCC, even though no witness or proof of that has ever been given. Christ's church is not a building or a denomination. Christ's church is made up of all believers, even those who for whatever reason do not attend A church---a physical building.

Christ is an apostle, and has authority to send other apostles, the apostles also have this authority, so the apostles continue down thru the centuries as Christ promised! Matt 28:19-20

Here you must make a distinction between apostle as given in the Scripture regarding the laying of the foundation of Christ's church, that is, it's true teachings, and that is complete within the pages of Scripture, not to be added to or taken from; and apostle by its definition only of sent one. And those sent ones must adhere strictly and faithfully to those same teachings the Bible apostles gave, as pertaining to salvation and who Jesus is and what He accomplished and completed. And if they do not, if they deny or add to what is given, they have sent themselves, God has not sent them. But there is no succession of foundation laying apostles.

Keys of jurisdictional authority! Open and shut And power to bind and loose!

Keys of authority based of the foundational doctrines, teachings, established by the apostles. Not the RCC who you say has this authority and only has this authority. That has yet to be proven and cannot be proven because it declares itself to be in that capacity and no one and nothing else does declare it.

Moral authority:
(Teaching)
Necessity of being taught by Christ:
Two edge sword: defining truth and condemning errors, and Interpreting scripture.

God alone is the moral authority, and He defines that morality for us in His word. The RCC is not Christ. We find what Christ teaches in His word, and the heart of a man is in the hand of God. It is God who holds all knowledge and wisdom and understanding, and it is God who opens or shuts the ears of man.

The Bible defines truth and condemns evil, and not all error is evil. It is the Holy Spirit who instructs and interprets scripture. It is God who gathers His people to the Son, it is Christ who leads His people in paths of righteousness---and He does these things often by means of the voices of His people----but He never gives that authority and sovereignty to a man, men, or denomination. He sets no denomination or corporation up as the sole determiner or interpreter of His word. And especially that authority is not given to an organization that blatantly and unrepentantly distorts and corrupts it for its own personal greed and gain. Or one that is filled with and always has been full of corruptions even within its hierarchy.

Jurisdictional authority:
(Governing / administering)
Necessity of Peter and the apostles and their successors to govern the holy church.

The holy church is not the RCC---as it is far from holy, and even sets itself up in the temple of God that is the believers, as God. Which is what the RCC does, no matter how they try to spin it. Succession of visible church government is not what the apostles established. They established organized leadership and oversight of these leaders, so as to not have chaos but order, and as a means of keeping the foundation firm and true.

Spiritual authority:
(Life of Grace)
Sanctifying thru the mass and Sacraments for the forgiveness of sin.

Christ provided forgiveness of sin for all who trust in Him----and Him alone---for salvation. It is through faith in Him that we are justified, reconciled to God, and forever.

So even in this that you post, you see where the RCC has set itself in the place of Christ?

 

[donadams]

Let me ask you this. Would Jesus in agreement with the Father prohibit drinking blood and at the same time tell us to drink it? Even Paul prohibited it for the Gentiles also and we know that Paul was in agreement with Jesus. So if in the Eucharist the wine becomes blood, are you not drinking blood? And if you acknowledge that what Jesus said in John 6 is not literal but metaphor, why in the Eucharist must it become literal? What do you think Jesus actually meant in John 6?

Then why are some sick and dead? 1 cor 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

You need to provide scripture for what you are referring too?

 

[Arial]

Then why are some sick and dead? 1 cor 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

Are there any sick or dead who partake of the Catholic Eucharist? Or do you just tell yourself that if they get sick and/or die they partook of the Eucharist without going to confession and getting absolution from your priest. I have news for you. We all get sick. And we all eventually die. So rethink what Paul means.

You need to provide scripture for what you are referring too?

Scripture for what? That God prohibits the eating of human flesh and drinking the blood of man or animal? And how do the scriptures you gave in any way answer or even address the questions I asked?

 

[Arial]

Some but not all of God’s truth is in scripture and I use it for your sake, cos you believe the five solas!

The universal apostolic church

Christ established the church and endowed it with his authority Matt 16:18-19 Matt 28:20 Jn 16:13 & 20:21 Matt 18:17 1 Tim 3:15

What He did not establish and you have not either is that the Catholic church is the apostolic church. The apostolic church refers to the church in the lives of the apostles, Peter, Andrew, James, John, Phillip, Nathanael, Matthew, Thomas, James the Less, Simon the Zealot, Thaddeus or Jude, Matthias, Paul. These, and these alone were given the authority by Jesus to teach the doctrines that He taught them, with the same authority as though it were Jesus speaking, as the foundation on which His church---all those God gives to Christ---(not all those the RCC gives to Christ). Christ is the cornerstone---the plumb line so to speak---and these apostles laid the foundation, revealing to us the things that Jesus in His earthly ministry accomplished, but were not fully revealed until after His ascension. No other cornerstone is to be used, no other foundation built upon. What is added to the foundation are people, not doctrines.

1 Peter 2:4-6 As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture: "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame."

1 Cor 3:9 For we are God's fellow workers. Your are God's field, God's building.

Eph 2:19-22 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grow into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

 

[Josheb]

Christ on the cross / John and Mary Magdalene there as the mystical body of christ

Post 11.

 

[donadams]

Are there any sick or dead who partake of the Catholic Eucharist? Or do you just tell yourself that if they get sick and/or die they partook of the Eucharist without going to confession and getting absolution from your priest. I have news for you. We all get sick. And we all eventually die. So rethink what Paul means.

Scripture for what? That God prohibits the eating of human flesh and drinking the blood of man or animal? And how do the scriptures you gave in any way answer or even address the questions I asked?

Yes scripture please?
Jesus Christ truth itself (Jn 14:6) explicitly COMMANDS it!

Paul is referring to the Eucharist repeating the institution!

 

[donadams]

What He did not establish and you have not either is that the Catholic church is the apostolic church. The apostolic church refers to the church in the lives of the apostles, Peter, Andrew, James, John, Phillip, Nathanael, Matthew, Thomas, James the Less, Simon the Zealot, Thaddeus or Jude, Matthias, Paul. These, and these alone were given the authority by Jesus to teach the doctrines that He taught them, with the same authority as though it were Jesus speaking, as the foundation on which His church---all those God gives to Christ---(not all those the RCC gives to Christ). Christ is the cornerstone---the plumb line so to speak---and these apostles laid the foundation, revealing to us the things that Jesus in His earthly ministry accomplished, but were not fully revealed until after His ascension. No other cornerstone is to be used, no other foundation built upon. What is added to the foundation are people, not doctrines.

1 Peter 2:4-6 As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture: "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame."

1 Cor 3:9 For we are God's fellow workers. Your are God's field, God's building.

Eph 2:19-22 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grow into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

Apostles continue till Christ returns Matt 28:19-20 acts 1:8 Jn 20:21

Apostles have the same authority as Christ Jn 20:21 Christ made and sent apostles so the apostles continue to make and send apostles

 

[Arial]

Apostles continue till Christ returns Matt 28:19-20 acts 1:8 Jn 20:21

Apostles have the same authority as Christ Jn 20:21 Christ made and sent apostles so the apostles continue to make and send apostles

It does nothing to prove you case ignoring what I said and simply repeating the mantra you have been brainwashed with. The RCC is very cultish in that way. It removes the ability for one to think for themselves. It makes people very afraid to do so as it sets itself up as the only way to avoid hell and the wrath of God. But that is not true. It is a lie from the pit of hell itself.

 

[Arial]

Yes scripture please?
Jesus Christ truth itself (Jn 14:6) explicitly COMMANDS it!

Paul is referring to the Eucharist repeating the institution!

If I have to give you the scriptures prohibiting the drinking of blood and the eating of human flesh, I can only assume you have not read the OT, have a skewed moral compass, and do not even pay that close to the NT except where the Catholic church uses it to validate themselves.
Acts 15:28-29 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden that these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality, If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell."

Lev 17:14 The life of every creatured is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the peopleof Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.

 

[Mr GLee]

Jn 6:50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

The bread that came down from heaven was manna "what is it?" signaling another unfamiliar will. The Son of man Jesus our brother in the Lord is from earth living in a body of death. Salvation did not come up from the field of clay as flesh and blood. The Holy Spirt poured out his spirit in jeapordy of his own on dying flesh and blood. that defines to eat the flesh and drink the blod in those parbles

Our daily bread that comes down the unseen will of God called hidden manna to eat the flesh is to do the will of the father the kind of food hidden from the apostles at first the food that rises to new born again spirit life.

Things that enter one's literal mouth cannot possibly enter the soul of dying mankind. It as draught must be covered to keep the fragrance of death down it is not the sweet fragrance of the gospel.

I personally feel offends God in that way "coming out as draught". The Pharisees a government of venerable puffed-up dying mankind as a law of the fathers called Jesus Beelzebub King of the flies. not knowing it was them that stunk.

Deuteronomy 23:13 And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee:


.Mark 7:18-20King James Version18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats? And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the ma

Sound like the defiling round wafers. not the fountain of born again youth.

 

[donadams]

It does nothing to prove you case ignoring what I said and simply repeating the mantra you have been brainwashed with. The RCC is very cultish in that way. It removes the ability for one to think for themselves. It makes people very afraid to do so as it sets itself up as the only way to avoid hell and the wrath of God. But that is not true. It is a lie from the pit of hell itself.

There is only one ark of salvation!

There is only one authoritative teacher of Christians!

If you believe the sola’s then you believe scripture is the ONLY authority therefore there can be authority to interpret or give meaning to scripture!

The church is the pillar of truth! 1 Tim 3:15