Fr MIKE Schmitz SHUTS down PROTESTANTS on EUCHARIST being just a SYMBOL !
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 сен 2024
- #catholic #catholichurch #catholicism
JD Catholic Engage is a Catholic channel that seeks to foster a deeper understanding of our Catholic faith by engaging with atheists, Protestants, non-Christians, and our fellow Catholics.
00:17 Intro
01:33 Eva shares her testimony
03:23 Three things we can learn from her TESTIMONY
04:49 Fr Mike says EUCHARIST is not a SYMBOL
07:00 Three things that we can learn from FR Mike
Original Video: • Biblical PROOF The Euc...
Support - / jdcatholicengage
Get in touch - jdonhigh@gmail.com
Instagram - / jdcatholicengage
Tiktok- / jdsongonfirecatholic
Facebook - / songonfire16
Eva is inteligent enough and sincere enough to follow the truth...God bless her ,we welcome her to our 1.2 billion catholic family in Christ.
A fraction of the number you’ve mentioned are in truth Catholic most are pagan and pagan protestant’s. Did not Jesus say try to find the narrow path to salvation because i tell you many try to find it and don’t because most of mankind goes to HELL.
1.4 billion 😊
1.4 billion plus 1. Count me in because I'm coming home
@@lordzaveana918excellent!
@@lordzaveana918 🎉 Praise be to God! God love you. ✝
Let's continue praying for our protestant friends to find the truth
Amen 🙏🏼❤️ They know Jesus. They love him. We are all on a different journey. They could be so much father from the truth. Think of the billions who don’t know him or choose not to love him. Jesus wants us all united - one church ❤
The problem is the hyper focus on the metaphysical and not remembrance through the action. The bread and wine IS Christ. Scripture just never clarifies how and in what sense directly because the point is not the substance but the action. Rome has become obsessed with the substance and has forgotten the action. And worse, this has created several generations of fallen away Catholics who focus on their faith in their faith rather than keeping their eyes directly on Jesus.
thank you for your prayers -I have found the truth and its not catholic
@@zoelong6021 oh gosh please tell me it’s not Mormon lol
@@zoelong6021then you have not found the truth
The Bible is crystal clear on this . Jesus watches his followers leave him. And he doesn’t stop and say - wait, wait, no it’s just symbolism. He reaffirms it is truly him we must partake of.
Correct, very obvious to those with open eyes! Not the ref to Jn 6v66, with God there are no coincidences!
@@geoffjs John 6:61-66 61 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! 63 The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you-they are full of the Spirit[a] and life. 64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. 65 He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.” Is Jesus flesh and blood now. No, he is not. Jesus gave His Disciples bread and wine, He said do this in remembrance of me. It does not matter if a person say it is His flesh or not. Jesus gave us His flesh on the cross. He let His blood shed for our sins. That is our salvation.
@@JenniferMiller-sx1xn The obvious things are why Catholics never mention all the OT verses Jesus brings up in John 6. It would help Catholics understand the meaning behind it better.
“Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited those devoted to them. We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat.”
Hebrews 13:9-10
three are no kosher laws here.
Don’t be led astray (Eucharist is maybe one of the best arguments against OSAS). Don’t be led astray by strange and diverse doctrine…. Food doesn’t give grace nor benefit you… says it straight up.
Verse 10 We serve and altar (Paul says we, so he is including him self, Paul never ate Jesus), and those that serve the tent (the Bible says we are all priests now) HAVE NO RIGHT TO EAT. Pretty straight forward… Can’t eat it is strange and diverse, which means perverted and satanic.
If you read the other verses of John 6 you will find Jesus has just fed the people with physical food twice and now comes the hard part where Jesus tells the people if they do not internalize Christ into their lives spiritually they will not see the kingdom of God. In the old testament God provided physical food ( Manna ) and in the new testament God provides spiritual food.
John 6::26 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw the signs I performed but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. 27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.”
28 Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”
29 Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”
When you accept bad teaching as if it is true it is far harder to change your mind on an issue , and the Jews had been taught by the leadership of the temple that the Messiah was coming to conquer not give His life spiritually . John 6:63 sums up the eucharist as being spiritual as the flesh counts for nothing.
@@brucewmclaughlin9072 I think you need to clarify your statement. It reads to me as if you are saying the Eucharist is just symbolic. That Catholics are confused by “bad doctrine”. What you are referencing is agnosticism. The idea that the body means nothing which the church has always categorically rejected. Jesus took on flesh because we are our bodies and soul, not one or the other, but both .
The Eucharist is definitely the Real Presence. My inability to comprehend it doesn't make it less real, it means I struggle to understand it fully. We fail to fully know or comprehend who our parents are but that in no way means they are in fact not fully our parents. GOD bless us and help our hearts and minds to accept this truth!
Communion
Let me ask you some questions--while eating the body of Christ--have you ever asked yourself :what part of His body am I eating? His ears? Toes? Butt? Butt hole? Finger?--And -when does Christ replace His body that has been eaten? Before communion or after? Does His body taste like human flesh--or bread?
Drinking His blood--Does it have a metalic taste like human blood? Same comsistency as blood? Has it been oxygenated? Is it blood before the heart or after the heart? Does the blood smell like blood--or wine?
When does Jesus replace it ? Before communmion or after? There is average 6 pints of blood in a body.What does Christ do when it has ALL been drank up in one communion?---Is His blood everflowing? -From what part of His body? IF It looks like bread. Smells like bread, taste like bread--then it MUST be bread!!!--If it looks like wine, smells like wine, taste like wine--then it MUST be wine.
corded in this Book of God. "Every one that shall be found written in the book . . . shall awake to everlasting life".
-----****One "eats" God's Word by believing it and meditating upon it:
Isaiah 51:16 "I (the Lord) have put my words in your mouth ...".
Ezekiel 3:1 "... eat this scroll and go and speak to the House of Israel".
Jeremiah 15:16 "Your words were found and I did eat them ..."
Revelation 10:10 " I (John) took the little book out of the angel's hand and ate it".
>>>>
www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-jesus-meant-when-he-said-you-must-eat-my-flesh
-What Jesus Meant When He Said, “You Must Eat My Flesh"
The day before, Jesus had fed 5,000 people with a few loaves and fish. Then that night he walked miles across the Sea of Galilee before catching up with his disciples in their boat. The crowd had seen him send his disciples away in the only boat available. So the next day, when they found him in Capernaum, they knew he could have only got there miraculously. They wanted him to be their king.
Then he went and ruined everything. To his adoring fans Jesus said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves.*** Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.” (John 6:26-27)
More Than Bread
But wanting the blessings Jesus provides is not the same thing as believing in him. Indeed, Jesus had come to give them bread from heaven. But not that kind of bread.
****So, to test them, he began to make statements that sounded very strange. He told them that he was the true bread from heaven that gives life to the world, and whoever eats this bread would live forever.
“Jesus had come to give them bread from heaven. But not the kind of bread they were looking for.”
***Then he said, “And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh” (John 6:51). This sounded like cannibalism. His listeners balked. He pressed it even further:
“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. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.” (John 6:53-55)
The “Jesus for King” campaign evaporated. The people walked away, shaking their heads. The crazy man wants us to eat his flesh! They completely misunderstood what Jesus was saying.
So what did he mean? Here are the clues:
How do you labor for the food that endures to eternal life? Believe in me! (John 6:27, 29) “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me [in faith] shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” (John 6:35) “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40) “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.” (John 6:47)
Eating Is Believing
****For Jesus, eating is believing; drinking is believing. He promises eternal life to those who believe in him. Believe what?
Believe that his death - the breaking of his body and spilling of his blood - pays in full the penalty for our sin, and that his perfect righteousness is freely given to us in exchange for our unrighteousness.
“Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper because he did not want us to forget the very core of what we believe.”
Believing this is how we “eat” Jesus’ flesh and “drink” his blood. This is why he instituted the Lord’s Supper: he did not want us to forget the very core of what we believe.
****When the crowd took offense at his gruesome talk, Jesus exposed their unbelief: “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe” (John 6:63-64).
WHy did they walk a way???
Let’s you and I be like Peter. He didn’t walk away, but instead said to Jesus, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God” (John 6:68-69).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Communion
How do you labor for the food that endures to eternal life? Believe in me! (John 6:27, 29) “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me [in faith] shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” (John 6:35) “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40) “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.” (John 6:47)
--------------------------------
When the crowd took offense at his gruesome talk, Jesus exposed their unbelief: “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe” (John 6:63-64).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
if only we had some writings from the early Christians to help us interpret the Bible. Oh wait, we do. And some of them were students of John the favorite of Jesus. and all of them say the same thing about the Eucharist. Amazing....
Keep doing the good work, brother from down under
Not to mention that when Jesus tells the crowd "If you do not eat my flesh and drink my blood, you cannot have the Kingdom of Heaven", and when they ask him if this is symbolic he responds by using words like "gnaw" and "chew". He was very literal. Not to mention that He had made Himself the passover lamb, and what was the instruction in exodus? After the sacrifice, "the lamb must be eaten hastily" and in any household which did not, the angel of death would arrive and kill their firstborn, as they had not completed the act.
Jesus was clear, and when we look at WHAT Jesus was fulfilling, it is even more clear. The fact that protestants still deny this as to otherwise would lead them to Catholicism, is to me proof that protestantism is one of the greatest successes of Satan.
@@kelly4187 I agree, Kelly. This is one of those protestant differences that I just don’t understand because Jesus provides the clarification and he doubles down hard. So hard that people leave him. They wouldn’t have done that if it was symbolic. he spoken plenty of symbols and metaphors that are quite confusing and hard to understand even by the 12 but this teaching was clearly non-symbolic because like I said people left. It’s really the only time that I can think of or he gives a teaching and then the explanation and people leave. The only one that comes to mind is the rich man.
@@kelly4187 John 6:63
@@fivevs1 John 6:63
The problem is the hyper focus on the metaphysical and not remembrance through the action. The bread and wine IS Christ. Scripture just never clarifies how and in what sense directly because the point is not the substance but the action. Rome has become obsessed with the substance and has forgotten the action. And worse, this has created several generations of fallen away Catholics who focus on their faith in their faith rather than keeping their eyes directly on Jesus.
Praise God early Church writings confirm this
Didache 9.1 - (AD 100) Now, concerning the Eucharist, practice it as follows. " First, concerning the cup: We give thanks to you, our Father, for the holy vine of David your son, which you made known to us through Jesus your son, glory to you forever a Next, concerning the broken BREAD: We give thanks to you, our Father, for the life and knowledge which you made known to us through Jesus your son, glory to you forever. Just as this broken bread was being scattered over the mountains and being brought together it became one; likewise bring together your church from the ends of the earth into your kingdom, so that yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever But none shall eat or shall drink from your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; for also concerning this the Lord has said,
"Do give not what is holy to the dogs."
- Notice, there’s never a transubstantiated description, but rather in action of giving thanks. Also, notice who can partake of the Eucharist. It’s not members of the church or members of Rome. It’s those who have put their faith in Christ alone. Unbelievers cannot partake.-
The Didache (AD 100): “On the Lord’s day assemble and break bread and give thanks, having first confessed YOUR sins, that your sacrifice may be pure. If any have a dispute with his fellow, let him not come to the assembly till they be reconciled, that your sacrifice be not polluted. For this is the sacrifice spoken of by the Lord; ‘In every place and at every time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great king, said the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the Gentiles; (Mal. i. 11, 14).”
This doesn’t refer to Jesus’ sacrifice, but to “your sacrifice.” The same Greek word for “sacrifice” (thusia) is used of Jesus’ sacrifice (Heb. 5:1), but it is also used of doing good deeds, praise, and financial giving (Heb. 13:15-16; Phil. 4:18). The same book also refers to the supper as the “cup” and the “bread,” and a means of remembering Jesus’ sacrifice in thanksgiving (Didache, 9).
Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 180) stated that the elements do not lose the nature of bread and wine (Against Heresies, 4.18.4-5; 5.2.2).
Tertullian (AD 200) said Jesus’ statement was figurative (Against Marcion, 3.19).
Clement of Alexandria (AD 200) called the bread and wine symbols of Jesus’ body (The Instructor, I.6).
Origen (AD 250) held his typical allegorical and spiritual view when referring to the elements in the Last Supper.
Eusebius of Caesarea (AD 340) called the elements the body and blood of Christ, but also referred to them as symbolic of spiritual realities (On the Theology of the Church, 3.2.12).
Augustine (AD 350) believed that John 6:53 should be understood spiritually and symbolically-not literalistically (On Christian Doctrine 3.16.2).
Gelasius I (5th century pope): “The sacrament which we receive of the body and blood of Christ is a divine thing. Wherefore also by means of it we are made partakers of the divine nature. Yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine does not cease to be… Thus, as the elements pass into this, that is, the divine substance by the Holy Ghost, and none the less remain in their own proper nature.”
The early Christians in the second century believed it was the body and blood of Christ. These early church fathers were taught by the evangelist John. The Holy Spirit guides the church against serious error. There have been Eucharist miracles which exhibit cardiac muscle and blood of the group AB as is found on the Shroud.
Yes. The Eucharist is the Lifeblood of the Church. Without it, the Church would cease to exist.
@johnfrancis4401 Yessir! The early Church received the consecrated Host in their hands - but unlike today, they had a veil over their hand as to not defile Him. That's just history! As St. Iraneus said, 'Run away from anyone who claims the Eucharist is not the Body and Blood of Christ!' God love you. ✝
@ChiRhoJoeKnows-lo5le ...."a veil over their hand as to not defile Him" Do you think your mouth is any less defiling than your hand? What about your intestines? And within a day where does "Him" end up?
John, could you say more about the miracles you mentioned?
@@kmiller5808 Go onto RUclips. Type in Fr Mark Goring CC then add Eucharistic miracles.
Protestants argue that the Eucharist is merely symbolic, even after reading John 6, because to agree that Jesus was speaking literally would be to for them to admit that Catholics were right and they themselves have been rejecting Christ all along. It's hard to admit that for "x" number of years you've been rejecting Jesus, that after arguing that we need a personal relationship with Jesus, you've been rejecting the most personal relationship possible.
It seems to have a personal relationship with Christ it must also be physical, not just Platonic, as Thomas was shown and Eucharist makes possible.
The only Protestants that say it's symbolic are Baptists.
you are a biased roman catholic. i have never rejected Jesus Christ.
100% true
Protestants argue that the Eucharist is merely symbolic,
Not merely as if it can be ignored . The Lord's supper / eucharist is done in full respect of what Christ has done on the cross for us.
even after reading John 6, because to agree that Jesus was speaking literally would be to for them to admit that Catholics were right
Nice try at disinformation. Read the Torah and you will see that Jesus and the disciples knew that eating the body and drinking the blood was forbidden. John 6:63 sums up the teaching and points out the flesh is not enhanced.
and they themselves have been rejecting Christ all along.
Born again believers who were Protestants have never rejected Christ , they have rejected a doctrine that puts Christ back on the alter to forgive sins when He died once and for all.
It's hard to admit that for "x" number of years you've been rejecting Jesus,
It's sadto admit that for "x" number of years you've been re sacrificing Jesus,
that after arguing that we need a personal relationship with Jesus, you've been rejecting the most personal relationship possible
No believer is rejecting Christ they are rejecting the putting of Christ back on the alter to forgive sins that He already forgave once and for all!
Touch the hearts of all humanity, to see you in the Bread of Life, the divine bread, divine presence. Ave Maria, Viva Christo Rey
Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.
Bread is coming to Christ
Wine is believing in Him
Fr. Mike Schmitz brilliantly clarifies the Catholic perspective on the Eucharist! His explanation beautifully highlights the deep spiritual significance and the profound belief in the Real Presence. God bless!
Body and blood of Christ Jesus save us Amen 🤍✝️🕊💙✝️🕊❤️✝️🕊
*The Scriptural Basis for the Catholic Interpretation of the Eucharist*
_Bonus Feature: Teachings of the Early Church Fathers_
*The Passover Lamb*
The Passover lamb in Exodus 12, whose blood saved the Israelites, prefigures Jesus, the Lamb of God, whose sacrifice saves humanity (John 1:29).
*Manna from Heaven*
The manna provided by God in the wilderness (Exodus 16) foreshadows Jesus as the true bread from heaven, offering eternal life (John 6:48-51).
*Birth in Bethlehem and the Manger*
Jesus' birth in Bethlehem ("house of bread") and being laid in a manger signifies that He is the spiritual nourishment for humanity (Luke 2:7).
*The Bread of the Presence*
The Bread of the Presence in the Old Testament (Exodus 25:30) symbolizes God’s presence, which is fulfilled in the Eucharist where Jesus is truly present (Matthew 26:26-28).
*John 6*
In John 6, Jesus explicitly instructs, "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you" (John 6:53-56), emphasizing the necessity of the Eucharist for eternal life.
*The Last Supper and the Institution of the Eucharist*
At the Last Supper, Jesus institutes the Eucharist, transforming bread and wine into His body and blood as the new covenant sacrifice (Matthew 26:26-28).
*The Early Church's Understanding*
Early Christians practiced and understood the Eucharist as the real presence of Christ, as emphasized by Saint Paul (1 Corinthians 10:16; 1 Corinthians 11:27-29).
*The Teachings of the Church Fathers*
Church Fathers like Ignatius of Antioch and Justin Martyr affirmed the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, with Ignatius calling it "the flesh of our Savior" (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 7:1).
*Conclusion*
The Catholic belief in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is deeply rooted in Scripture and tradition, with Old and New Testament prefigurations, Jesus’ own instructions in John 6, His words at the Last Supper, and the consistent teaching of the early Church and Church Fathers.
When Jesus said to his disciples, I will be with you always to the end of age, we should also reflect as to how Jesus kept his word.
Jesus has been with the Catholics through the sacraments especially the sacrament of the Eucharist and Reconciliation
Amen. May we receive Him worthily and humbly through this beautiful sacrament.
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
in John 6 Jesus is talking about the Word of God, of which He is the embodiment (the Word was made flesh)
John and Ezekiel are told to eat the Word of God (scrolls) in visions, within the vision this is literal, but in reality it is symbolic, to internalize the Word and to live it out.
at least that's how i see it.
Matthew 4:4 ..., It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
@@supersilverhazeroker _It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life (Jn 6:63)._
In this passage, Jesus does not state that _His flesh_ is of no avail. If that were true, then His death on the cross would be meaningless.
Instead, Jesus states that _the flesh_ is of no avail. "The flesh" refers to unenlightened human reasoning that is not animated by the Holy Spirit. This type of fleshy thinking cannot help us to understand Jesus' discourse on the Eucharist in John 6.
John 6:63, within the broader context of Jesus' teaching, supports the Catholic view that understanding the Eucharist requires faith and the Spirit's enlightenment. It does not negate the literal and real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist but calls for a deeper, spiritual comprehension beyond mere human reasoning.
@@randycarson9812 my reasons for using that verse was not because of that part but about his words being spirit.
Also the disciples didn't take from all that that he had the flesh of eternal life but he had the words of eternal life.
68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
Jesus' flesh is the Word of God (John 1:1, 1:14)
The disciples who left were the first Protestants!
Actually, they would be Catholics; because like Catholics, they believed in a literal, physical consumption, not a spiritual consumption, that is faith, like Protestants, as Christ confirmed in (63), that the flesh is of nothing, but His Words are SPIRITUAL.
Sorry, you got it backwards.
@@markmeyer45321 Corinthians 11
27 Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and [f]blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks [g]in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the [h]Lord’s body.
Prove it modern day sperm and egg of creation who has never been visited by any Angel!
@@Sikxrio John 6:63 The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you-they are full of the Spirit and life.
1 Cor 11:27 27 USCCB
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.*
@@mitchellosmer1293 yes. Keep reading till verse 29.
29. For he who eats and drinks in an unwhorty manner eats and drinks judgement to himself, NOT DISCERNING THE LORD’S BODY.
Wait. Do you have to discern the Lord’s Body before you eat the bread and drink from the cup? So what means discern?
Meaning of discern: recognize or find out.
Wait, I thought it was simbolic. But do you have to recognize that it is the Lord’s Body before take it? Because if you don’t, you are eating and drinking judgment to yourself? Wow. I better recognize the Lord’s Body. And if you do not do it, it’s your problem. But stop twist scriptures for the loss of others.
After disconnected from the Catholic church the Protestant realized the pastors apostolic succession from Jesus were disconected thats why no body is qualified to handle the ritual of the eucharist, then decided to ignore the verses of the last supper.
All man made yet they wag the finger
Yes, exactly correct! Without a validly ordained priesthood, the Real Presence can’t be confected, so no memorial REPRESENTATION can be made. So without altars & no liturgical sacrificial worship, Protestantism doesn’t have “church”, more like synagogue with prayer & teaching!
@@geoffjs Communion
Let me ask you some questions--while eating the body of Christ--have you ever asked yourself :what part of His body am I eating? His ears? Toes? Butt? Butt hole? Finger?--And -when does Christ replace His body that has been eaten? Before communion or after? Does His body taste like human flesh--or bread?
Drinking His blood--Does it have a metalic taste like human blood? Same comsistency as blood? Has it been oxygenated? Is it blood before the heart or after the heart? Does the blood smell like blood--or wine?
When does Jesus replace it ? Before communmion or after? There is average 6 pints of blood in a body.What does Christ do when it has ALL been drank up in one communion?---Is His blood everflowing? -From what part of His body? IF It looks like bread. Smells like bread, taste like bread--then it MUST be bread!!!--If it looks like wine, smells like wine, taste like wine--then it MUST be wine.
corded in this Book of God. "Every one that shall be found written in the book . . . shall awake to everlasting life".
-----****One "eats" God's Word by believing it and meditating upon it:
Isaiah 51:16 "I (the Lord) have put my words in your mouth ...".
Ezekiel 3:1 "... eat this scroll and go and speak to the House of Israel".
Jeremiah 15:16 "Your words were found and I did eat them ..."
Revelation 10:10 " I (John) took the little book out of the angel's hand and ate it".
>>>>
www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-jesus-meant-when-he-said-you-must-eat-my-flesh
-What Jesus Meant When He Said, “You Must Eat My Flesh"
The day before, Jesus had fed 5,000 people with a few loaves and fish. Then that night he walked miles across the Sea of Galilee before catching up with his disciples in their boat. The crowd had seen him send his disciples away in the only boat available. So the next day, when they found him in Capernaum, they knew he could have only got there miraculously. They wanted him to be their king.
Then he went and ruined everything. To his adoring fans Jesus said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves.*** Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.” (John 6:26-27)
More Than Bread
But wanting the blessings Jesus provides is not the same thing as believing in him. Indeed, Jesus had come to give them bread from heaven. But not that kind of bread.
****So, to test them, he began to make statements that sounded very strange. He told them that he was the true bread from heaven that gives life to the world, and whoever eats this bread would live forever.
“Jesus had come to give them bread from heaven. But not the kind of bread they were looking for.”
***Then he said, “And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh” (John 6:51). This sounded like cannibalism. His listeners balked. He pressed it even further:
“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. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.” (John 6:53-55)
The “Jesus for King” campaign evaporated. The people walked away, shaking their heads. The crazy man wants us to eat his flesh! They completely misunderstood what Jesus was saying.
So what did he mean? Here are the clues:
How do you labor for the food that endures to eternal life? Believe in me! (John 6:27, 29) “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me [in faith] shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” (John 6:35) “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40) “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.” (John 6:47)
Eating Is Believing
****For Jesus, eating is believing; drinking is believing. He promises eternal life to those who believe in him. Believe what?
Believe that his death - the breaking of his body and spilling of his blood - pays in full the penalty for our sin, and that his perfect righteousness is freely given to us in exchange for our unrighteousness.
“Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper because he did not want us to forget the very core of what we believe.”
Believing this is how we “eat” Jesus’ flesh and “drink” his blood. This is why he instituted the Lord’s Supper: he did not want us to forget the very core of what we believe.
****When the crowd took offense at his gruesome talk, Jesus exposed their unbelief: “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe” (John 6:63-64).
WHy did they walk a way???
Let’s you and I be like Peter. He didn’t walk away, but instead said to Jesus, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God” (John 6:68-69).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Communion
How do you labor for the food that endures to eternal life? Believe in me! (John 6:27, 29) “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me [in faith] shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” (John 6:35) “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40) “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.” (John 6:47)
--------------------------------
When the crowd took offense at his gruesome talk, Jesus exposed their unbelief: “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe” (John 6:63-64).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
@@Knight-of-the-Immaculatayou are too young to ever witness the incarnation of JESUS nor his life to include hand selecting Twelve men. You were never present to see the last supper nor Pentecost! Which prophet visited you?
@@duanewoodson9804which of your 45,000 false man made Protestant denominations taught you that comical garbage?
" To eat the flesh of Christ ! This is a hard saying, but to believe that Christ died for me, to derive from that doctrine strength and comfort in my approaches to God, my oppositions to sin and preparations for a future state, this is the spirit and life of that saying and, construing it thus , it is an excellent saying ! " Matthew Henry commentary on John 6
Anyone with doubts about the Real Presence should read up about Eucharistic Miracles. It was such a Miracle that inspired the Solemnity of Corpus Christi.
I like the way that readings from John 6 are read at Mass in Year B from Week 17 to Week 21. This gives priests a good opportunity to give good Eucharistic Homilies, as well as the annual ones on Maundy Thursday and Corpus Christi.
This is his command: Jesus had asked us to eat the bread and drink wine. Are we going to disobey him?😂
John 6 is clear about the what Jesus meant by thy flesh and blood. Initially the disciples got confused; offended and some even left him. But as most of the time the explanation comes later and Jesus clarifies that Jesus meant it as life and spirit. Anything other meaning is human added.
Hello Catholics, as what you would call a “Protestant,” perhaps I can explain to you what we believe about interpreting Scripture. One of our most important hermeneutical principles is CONTEXT. I encourage you to open your Bible and read the Scriptures that are being mentioned in this video:
Matthew 26:26-29
Mark 14:22-25
Luke 22:14-20
In all three accounts, Jesus takes the bread they are eating as part of the Passover meal and then says “This is my body.” Jesus says this before he has died on the cross to his disciples and so in this context, why would they think that this bread of the Passover meal is the actual body of Christ? They would not have taken it that way when it is originally said. They would have taken it as he is holding up the bread and handing it to them as a symbol of his body. In this Scripture that is the literal interpretation because that is how Jesus originally meant it in context.
As far as John 6, Jesus is using bread clearly as a symbol here if you take time to read the entire chapter. He has fed over 5,000 with literal bread in an amazing miracle. But now Jesus is claiming to be the bread of life who came down from God in heaven and who can give them eternal life where they can know God and be raised up on the last day. The whole problem here is that they are still thinking of the physical bread but Jesus is referring to them having life in their soul. This is similar to what he said to the woman at the well in John 4 about living water or what he said to Nicodemus in John 3 about being born again. Reading through John we see a continual challenge where people are thinking only physically but Jesus is teaching them about a spiritual life of knowing God!
The question of context is what did Jesus mean when he originally said these things. Since Jesus was standing there with his body in front of them, they were not meant to think of his physical body at that moment and if they did that is why they walked away confused. Now that Jesus has sacrificed his body for us and shed his blood on the cross we can believe he has paid for our sins and by faith alone in Jesus we are graciously given salvation for our souls!
Hi I am a Catholic, I do see and understand your point. While I may not agree with your interpretation of them (more specifically John 6 since it is the divider of the beliefs) I do bring up the counter argument of John 6 of when the Apostles questioned Jesus on the teaching and Jesus doubled down as a matter of fact. I’d your take on it since to me it feels lacking and overall unnecessary to include that if the Eucharist was symbolic rather than literal.
Mike Schmitz didn’t read all the way to verse 63.
“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.”
John 6:63
He’s not speaking literal when he says to eat his flesh and drink his blood but is speaking spiritually
If the Eucharist is just symbolic, then why the Beas along with the Antichrist wants to put an end to this?
Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.” (Daniel 9:27)
“Who is there even among you who would shut the doors,
So that you would not kindle fire on My altar in vain?
I have no pleasure in you,”
Says the Lord of hosts,
“Nor will I accept an offering from your hands.
For from the rising of the sun, even to its going down,
My name shall be great among the Gentiles;
In every place incense shall be offered to My name,
And a pure offering;
For My name shall be great among the nations,”
Says the Lord of hosts. (Malachi 1:10-11)
“The grain offering and the drink offering. Have been cut off from the house of the Lord; The priests mourn, who minister to the Lord … Alas for the day! For the day of the Lord is at hand; It shall come as destruction from the Almighty.” (Joel 1 &2)
The problem is the hyper focus on the metaphysical and not remembrance through the action. The bread and wine IS Christ. Scripture just never clarifies how and in what sense directly because the point is not the substance but the action. Rome has become obsessed with the substance and has forgotten the action. And worse, this has created several generations of fallen away Catholics who focus on their faith in their faith rather than keeping their eyes directly on Jesus.
The Eucharist is Jesus ❤️
I would like to know from those who deny the real presence of Jesus Christ with his real flesh and blood in the Eucharist how you can profane the body and the blood of the Lord if it's only a symbolic memorial meal. Furthermore, how can you eat and drink judgement upon yourself by consuming it in an unworthy manner and not discerning the Eucharist body from normal food if it's NOT the real flesh and blood of Christ? 1 Cor. 11: 27 - 30.
In the context of verses 17 - 22, it's clear that Paul spoke of the discernment of the Eucharist body from the normal, secular meal.
@@dismas6992 this is pretty simple actually… have you ever read first Corinthians chapter 11 verses 17 to 34??
Does your Eucharist have over eating? Does your Eucharist have not sharing the meal? It says it’s an actual meal full courses. People getting drunk? Have people waiting for other people to eat? Because that’s what Paul’s talking about…
A full meal … and if you read it when it says you’re not discerning the body of Christ…. He follows it up with same stop being rude to each other…. The body of Christ is the church people. Wait for each other, he says.
Is Baptism literally washing sins away or a ritual that symbolizes a truth? Seems distinct from a regular washing to me even if it is symbolic, no pleading for discernment necessary.
@@JC_Forum_of_Christ
Did you read my comment about 1 Cor. 11: 17-30 at all? Of course I have read these verses. But you have obviously no answer to my arguments.
@@dismas6992 Yeah...for some reason anti-Catholics begin EVERY argument with the assumption that Catholics have never read the Bible. To some degree it's true (and we can all do more reading), but it's a lousy way to open a discussion.
@@dismas6992 no I haven’t read your post. Sometimes RUclips does please re-post it. I would love to to hear what you have to say
Very helpful ❤
God be praised
Dinesh. The poll of 70 percent was in error. Read wrong. A newer poll lowers that# considerably!
The problem is the hyper focus on the metaphysical and not the remembrance in the action. The bread and wine IS Christ. Scripture just never clarifies how and in what sense directly because the point is not the substance but the action. Rome has become obsessed with the substance and has forgotten the action. And worse, this has created several generations of fallen away Catholics who focus on their faith in their faith rather than keeping their eyes directly on Jesus.
If the protestant believe bread is the symbolic of Jesus body, arent they breaking the commandment. If you cant make images of anything from heaven, then why are they taking bread as an image of body of Christ
SYMBOL...NOT IMAGE..
EVE TALKS TO THE SNAKE...NEXT TIME YOU SEE ONE..GO TALK TO IT
@@deborahderichter7926 Plenty of symbols out there. Inverted pentagram, Black Sun, Eye of Horus, etc.
Do "THIS" . . .? I was raised by Catholic parents. And NEVER, even once, did the Catholic Church hold a PASSOVER SEDER. And I have never heard that they ever do or ever have.
Totally failing to follow the words of Jesus.
I love the show, The Chosen, but knowing that Dallas Jenkins was not Catholic I was curious what he was going to do with this scene in the show. Basically he just decided to skip over it. Very disappointing, and even more so knowing lead actor, Jonathan Roumie is Catholic.
Yep. They also skipped the baptism of Christ. On the other hand, they did follow the interpretation that Peter is the rock. Oh well, still it is a great series to watch
That’s why it is fiction and they tell you to to go read a Bible . Maybe a Catholic will be inspired to remake these stories ❤
I think a question we need to ask was is the paycheck and break Jonathan Roumie caught with this role something he would have accepted with this source and summit of the Catholic faith being omitted? Just some discernment.
TWO THINGS...GOD DOESNT SACRIFICE CHILDREN..
AND GOD DOESNT SUPPORT CANIBALISM..
Reading John 6 in context, it’s not speaking about the last supper or the formal institution of communion. But rather, John 6 is primarily intended to illustrate the necessity of faith and spiritual sustenance rather than instituting a specific ritual such as the Eucharist.
And you know that how? Have you prayed about that or did someone just tell you that and it seemed good to you? Why are you arguing with Jesus about this? Why did he say it all wrong? Did those people that walked away not argue like you? Did he not let them walk away? Why would he if they had it right? He let the people who understood him leave and kept the ones who misunderstand?
If it's not symbolic, did Jesus eat himself at the Last Supper? If it really is body and blood than why doesn't it actually change? And why does the Bible say He made one sacrifice for all time before returning to His Father's throne?
So according to the Catholic superstitions - we now need to be cannibals now to be saved? According to Catholics, every other time Jesus was being symbolic...except for this one off course and they created a whole religion on this one perceived exception that has become tradition.
How is Catholic any different to Judaism then - when your salvation depends on deeds and rules embedded in traditions?
@@zoelong6021 you prolly saw this on my other post.
The problem is the hyper focus on the metaphysical and not remembrance through the action. The bread and wine IS Christ. Scripture just never clarifies how and in what sense directly because the point is not the substance but the action. Rome has become obsessed with the substance and has forgotten the action. And worse, this has created several generations of fallen away Catholics who focus on their faith in their faith rather than keeping their eyes directly on Jesus. You don’t do that by internalizing the idea of consuming him literally but rather by taking in the truth of his father which is his word.
Accepting everything the bible says at face value, if it includes the old testament, is problematic at best.
Separately, Martin Luther, as Catholic monk, challenges the hypocrisy of the church hundreds of years ago. Seems he was more Christian than the Catholic Church at the time.
Martin Luther's doctrine of the enslaved will is not Christian at all. He was raised in nominalist school Ockham and co. Luther was also a drunkard, very scrupulous and a womaniser. Breaking his vows and offering nuns to Princes of Germany and other Bishops. He was in other words, a pimp.
Don't spread misinformation based on some flawed assumption
@@Mark-bd5ci Ignoring the corruption of the Catholic Church, Spanish Inquisition, Crusades, Papal outrageous behavior, association with Hitler, etc, is what led to the pedophile scandal of today. Christ was humble, the church often not so much... Insulting others is not Christian.
1 Corinthians 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 🙏❤️❤️❤️❤️
The eucharist is not symbolic. It is the flesh and blood of Jesus.
Christ also said no one comes to the father except through me. Yet Catholics consistently pray to saints.
Yet the modern day sperm and egg of creation ignores history of Thomas Aquinas and Ignatius of Antioch and Cletus and Linus who lived well be fore your sperm and egg of creation and knew the twelve as compared to you. Wow, the modern day arrogance and foolery to try to state GOD waited for a non priest to be given revelation to speak as one as compared to Pentecost when JESUS entered the upper room and breathed the Paraclete above their heads and not yours!
Drinking blood is forbidden in the Torrah. If Jesus actually made the wine his blood, then wouldn't drinking it have been a sin? We know Jesus never sinned, and that he never broke a single law of the Torrah, not even eating pork. Therefore, doesn't it follow that Jesus must have meant the transformation of the eucharistic metaphorically not literally?
Jesus abolished following Works of the Law
@@fantasia55 But Jesus still upheld the law in his own life. He was only able to abolish the law because he was both God and never sinned. If he hadn't followed the law himself, he would have sinned and thus couldn't abolish it.
Protestant here, many of us do teach the real presence
Hey I am a Catholic and glad to see that it is taught and believed. But then I ask of why you aren’t Catholic if you believe in this since it is quite the pinnacle of Catholicism?
As a recent convert from a Bible Christian, I can tell you belief that the Eucharist is a symbol is Sacred Protestant Tradition. We took communion every week, knew the words, and threw the leftovers in the trash and down the drain. Pray for all to come home to Full Communion.
Insert Squidward meme leaving with the chair
If we do not truly and seriously take John 6:35 into context with the entire discourse of Jesus, within that chapter, we will always believe that His body and blood become the elements.
What is outrageous is that Jesus now has a glorified body. His earthly form was sacrificed for sins once and for all. The devil cannot pierce His body ever again. It is not a re-presenting of His once for all sacrifice, but a memorial; and a proclaiming of His death till He comes.
" Jesus now has a glorified body."
Right. Very, very Catholic !! Thank you! !!
Can those claiming to be in Christ please avoid inflammatory click bait? It just looks like "the world".
There have been many martyrs made because of this topic. There hasn't been agreement on John chapter 6 to this point and this video isn't going to end the disagreement.
Wait, why didn’t Jesus offer his body and blood right then and there? If it’s literal he should have been lining people up. Instead ”Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.“
Jesus literally says whom ever believes in me
He also says he’s bread of life does that mean Jesus turns into bread too? Bread to flesh and also flesh to bread
Jesus also said, I am the door. So, does the “Eucharist” taste like sawdust? 🤷🏼
Maybe the disciples called it a hard saying because in order to have communion with Christ they needed faith in his body and blood for their salvation. Lots of Jesus' analogies sparked controversy with the Jews. The argument you make is actually reversed: those who left interpreted it as literal body and blood, physical flesh; the disciples understood it as spiritual, yet still new, uncanny and mysterious since they had never had this thought in Judaism. God was now among them, embodied, as Christ; not distant in heaven.
Jesus said “I am” the light of the world. He said “I am” the door. He said “I am” the vine. The true vine. Can we take this literally and can a priest pray over these objects and consecrate them to be actually Jesus as the bread and wine are prayed over and considered to be the actual body and blood of Christ?
"Can we take this literally and can a priest pray over these objects and consecrate them to be actually Jesus as the bread and wine are prayed over and considered to be the actual body and blood of Christ?"
Yep. Trust Jesus and the universal teaching of his Church for 2000 years. Drop the protestantism and the Christianity is very clear in scripture. And note, in John 6, all those who heard him took him literally. No one took him speaking symbolically only. The crowds left him because of it and the Jews then wanted to kill him (ch 7, para 1)
*SCRIPTURE:* 51 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
*SCRIPTURE:* 52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
*SCRIPTURE:* 53 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;
*SCRIPTURE:* 54 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
*SCRIPTURE:* 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
*SCRIPTURE:* 56 He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
*SCRIPTURE:* 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.
That's why he saids it 3 times. Very truly I tell you...
If it is symbolic why repeat it right after resurevtion to two desciples on the road to emeus and they were able to recognize our Lord Jesus. If it is indeed symbolic why repeat it. It does not make sense.
"But I say to you, I WILL NOT DRINK FROM NOW ON OF THIS FRUIT OF THE VINE, UNTIL THAT DAY WHEN I DRINK IT NEW WITH YOU IN MY FATHER’S KINGDOM."
It's quite simple to understand that Jesus speaks about a symbol not His real flesh and blood!
What makes It so dificult to understand it???🤔
The clash of interpretations of John 6.
@@antokaknee What kind of interpretation? 😊
When I say it is now dark outside I'm not speaking about high noon...
@@hope4all69 To be general and frank, its the interpretation of when Jesus said he was the Bread of Life and that those who eat this bread / his flesh will not die. Its whether or not to take it literally or metaphorically which is the clash I stated before.
Also, I wanted to note that it's possible for the Eucharist to be a symbol AND for the doctrine of transubstantiation to be true at the same time. Yes, it's a symbol but it's not ONLY a symbol
As in any type of scholarly endeavor, you need to consult primary sources to form an adequate understanding of the matter at hand. I'm not protestant, but it might be wise to actually read some of the Lutheran confessional statements on the Eucharist and other matters and see what Luther and the Lutheran scholastics actually taught.
Some of them were real presence followers ....but tone needs to read a good deal to get a view ...eg consubstantiation theories. The real presence is under the bread appearances as the bread retains all its physical characteristics. See also St Augustine ....a real symbol .
@@tomgreene1843 One can find a very succinct, readable account in the recently published "The Venerable and Adorable Eucharist: A Study of the Lutheran Doctrine of the Lord's Supper in the 1500s" by T. Hardt published by Concordia Press.
@@ianmarcRoxU Thanks for that ...The Eucharist in Anglican tradition...by Simms and others was also good , ..probably now out of print, but covered a number of areas ...lent the book to someone 25 years ago ...never got it back !
That 70% figure is not accurate and it was based upon very misleading wording in a poorly executed poll.
The last figure I saw from a more professionally done poll was that more than 75% believe in the real presence.
You have a great channel, but you must dig more thoroughly in your research
Does anyone know if the 70% stat that is sited so often refers to ALL Catholics or only those that actually practice and attend Mass? If it's the former then that stat is less alarming, though obviously not good.
You like statistics? I live in a country with 53 % members of the Roman Catholic Church. When I left 35 years ago the share was even 74 %. Now guess how many of them really believe in Jesus Christ and what his sacrifice means for them.
Today an non catholic tried to say for me that God is only in Heaven, and I said that God is everywhere(to avoid confusion, God is NOT everything, I'm not an pantheist), specially in the Eucharist
Heretic comes from the Greek word chooser. A heretic is a chooser. Someone who chooses what they want to believe in opposition to the Divine teaching authority of the Catholic Church. 45,000 15 minute old different and conflicting Protestant denominations vs 2,000 year old teaching from Jesus, the Apostles and the early church. Keep choosing to protest if you want instead of truth.
My issue is that the Vatican, the pope, the catholic church, etc are constantly referenced as authoritative and the truth.
The only truth is the Lord Jesus who is the way the truth and the life. HE is the head of the church. A heretic would be someone is goes against that and usurps that authority.
Is it by GRACE you have been saved not by works. The catholic church is wrong because it claims the authority that belongs only to our God.
That is heretical. This is why the overwhelming majority of those come out of catholicism and not the other way around. I worship the ancient of days. Not the pope or the vatican.
I believe in salvation through faith as written in the Word. Of course there are Christians in every denomination, and non Christians in every denomination. The point is where we ultimately put our trust, and that's either in the blood of the Lamb, or a mere mortal man. You cite scripture, but so many of your claims and beliefs are nowhere to be found in the Bible. Purgatory, the pope, the Vatican, etc. But when protestants disagree over whether communion is the physical literal or physical symbolic, (but still take communion and value it immensely) then we're heretical? Someone does not add up here, and I would encourage all believers to do their own study in the word and not just go by what you hear. Use scripture to interpret scripture within its proper context.
What you do and how you respond to the gospel is the point of the Bible.
What is the point of Christ's coming and death? To put to end our bondage to sin, through faith so that one one may boast. My only boast is in King Jesus himself. And he will come again to rule and reign forever. His kingdom come and his will be done.
It's time we quit squabbling over these little things. Let's offer ourselves as living sacrifices, that we may live to make him known, that he may use us to his end in drawing those unto him. Protestants and catholics alike need to quit this pettiness.
"This is the leap of faith I had to make..." I hear you, Sister Eva. I was at your point when I was in RCIA 2005-2006. I slowly made this same leap in early 2007, and fully accepted the Real Presence by Ash Wednesday 2007, so that I was so relieved to leave mass for "Dismissal" during Lent, I would feel so hurt to not being able to participate in the Eucharistic Prayer and receive during those last six weeks before the Easter Vigil and my Confirmation (full initiation into the Catholic Church).
Misleading title please stop equating Baptist to ALL Protestants. No other mainline Protestant groups thinks it’s just a symbol.
"Do this in remembrance of Me."
That's what Jesus said about the Supper. Nothing in there saying, "do this so you may live." It should also be noted that the conversions throughout Acts don't accompany an eating of the Supper, yet they received the Holy Spirit. This doesn't denigrate or dismiss the coming together of His people and sharing in the Supper.
In John 6, we're told in verse 29- "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent." Then in verse 33, "For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." Verse 35- "Jesus said to them, 'I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst." Verse 40, "For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."
Jesus is clearly teaching that coming to and believing in Him is equal to eating his flesh and drinking his blood and that these words are spiritual, not fleshly.
When they said "how can this man give us his flesh to eat?" and "this is a hard saying; who can listen to it?" Jesus said, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life."
It should also be noted that Jesus explains the unbelief of those around Him by saying, "This is why I told you that no one can come to Me unless it is granted by the Father."
The belief in the real presence of the Eucharist raises questions about the effectiveness of the Holy Spirit. Does the regeneration of the born again believer by the Holy Spirit need to be supplemented? We're told that the Spirit witnesses with our spirit, that we should walk by the Spirit, the flesh is in conflict with the Spirit, and that we can know our faith by the fruit of the Spirit expressed in our lives. His kingdom is a spiritual kingdom.
If we're to take His words literally, that he's talking about his real body and blood to be presented in the Eucharist, then why doesn't the bread and wine literally make us never hungry or thirsty again? It seems there's no issue with seeing the promises as spiritual in nature.
As for the efficacy of the Supper in salvation, the easiest counter example would be the thief on the cross. Pretty sure he wasn't at the Supper with the 12. Judas also partook of the Supper. Or is the teaching that the first Last Supper didn't transubstantiate because Jesus was giving the bread himself? Also, if the Supper is so efficacious, why didn't the Holy Spirit descend on Pentecost while they were having the Supper? Seems like that would be a big endorsement that it's actually effectual.
Real presence just raises more questions than answers. I haven't even mentioned Christ's sacrifice being ,"once for all" and the implication that has for the ceremonial Mass. What's the point of re-presenting the sacrifice at the Mass? Where do we see a need for that?
@@controlclerk REAL Prescense means having FAITH in Christ and His Words, and being humble enough to accept His Words as True!
To give my two cents on your last part of the question of Christ’s sacrifice being once and for all, yes it was one time. I take the stand as a young Catholic so bear with me
When you say “re-presenting” I’m assuming you mean ‘doing again’ like his sacrifice wasn’t enough. What I was taught in Catholicism was that it was enough and that it was one sacrifice. The Eucharist is the presence of Christ. It is his body and blood, in the Trinity Jesus Christ is God we can all agree on that. So theologically speaking God is outside of time so our Communion is not a ‘do-over’ it is the same time as the Last Supper. Because God is outside of time.
To somewhat clarify your question of why we “need” to do this, well it was because God said so in John 6, but I see your stance on it and understand we have different interpretations of the verses. Which begs the question of whose interpretation is the Truth?
@@antokaknee so... are you saying the Holy Spirit needs to be supplemented via the presence of Christ? Perhaps you could elucidate the differences between our interpretations?
@@controlclerk That kinda gets into theological territory there. Since according to the Trinity, the Holy Spirit is God, and God is infinite and outside of time like I stated before.
Its not a matter of the Holy Spirit needs to be contained for supplementation in the Eucharist, we believe the Holy Spirit is infinite of course and practically everywhere, working through many people and things alike. Its more alongside the fact of the interpretation of John 6 that Jesus said he was the bread of life and that those who eat his bread/his flesh & drink this chalice/his blood (also stated in the Last Supper) will not die.
In a sense what I am saying is that no, the Holy Spirit doesn't need to be supplemented through the Eucharist, but Jesus said so within the Catholic interpretation of John 6 so we partake in the Eucharist because Jesus said he was and we chose to stay alongside that belief even if it sounded preposterous, just like the Apostles that stuck with Jesus after that teaching.
Again this is a matter of different interpretations and thus bringing up the question of which is the Truth, since they both have standpoints in this debate.
The catholic church is truly described in chapter 17 of Revelation.
lighten up Francis
Nope. It's about the Pagan Empire/city of Rome, (aka code name "Babylin). The Catholic Church wasn't drunk on the blood of martyrs. The CC was being persecuted. Now here is the description of the CC in Rev 21:1-4, 9-27.
@@c.IchthysMany of those murdered during the over 300 years of catholic church inquisitions were martyrs of Jesus. Rome was never known as a she.
@@c.IchthysThe catholic church tortured and murdered for over 300 years in their inquisitions. That is contrary to evry teaching of Jesus.
@@francissweeney7318 read my comment again and this time with due diligence. The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is "she", the Bride of Christ.
So the wafer and wine are Christ's body and blood? How does that work if I made the wagers with store bought flour and Welch's grape juice in church?
Edit: I would love to attend a Catholic church to see this wine turn into real blood and the bread made into real flesh. I am in Ohio, where CAN I witness and participate in this form of eucharist.
As a Catholic who goes to mass, they don’t quite literally transform into literal flesh and literal blood but rather they turn into the presence of Jesus as his body and blood. Weird phrasing I’m aware but the term ‘transubstantiation’ helps describes this better. Alongside St. Thomas Aquinas’ definition of it as well.
But if you are interested in them actually transforming there are Eucharistic Miracles that do happen if you would like to look into them since they are scientifically examined and studied because of the phenomenon.
@@antokaknee I am curious about that. Where would I learn more about such miracles?
Edit: I don't understand what is wrong with how one thinks of the Eucharist. Do you think you could try a better explanation than what this video stated?
@@ShiniGuraiJoker For looking up the miracles there a ton of sites on the internet but of course be wary since all information on the internet can be taken with a grain of salt. A website that I stated with was 'Eucharistic Miracles CAINA' (Catholic Apologetics Institution of North America). They give basically a crash course slide show and videos on the Eucharist, its belief of real presence through history and tradition, alongside the Eucharistic Miracles I stated earlier.
For you follow up edit question, the Eucharist is basically the pinnacle of the Catholic Church, without it the Catholic Church would not be the One True Church they proclaim to be and would make it fall into heresy/idolatry. Its because of the opposing side that the Eucharist is just a metaphor is quite literally cutting off God's grace.
The argument gets very antsy but the gist is that The Eucharist is the pinnacle of Catholicism and believed to be a wonderful gift from God. And those who oppose it are basically butting heads with Catholicism/Orthodoxy/Any Apostolic Church that proclaim to be the One True Church that Jesus founded over 2000 years ago
Christ is calling us to receive Him truly - not symbolically. The bread that we break is the symbol of a much greater reality that Christ is with us always - truly and not symbolically. We receive the bread as Christ by faith - it is not what we do but what Christ has done for us. It is worship not dependent on our feelings and thoughts but on our faith. It is the new and everlasting convenant that one cannot break. This covenant is again - true and great, not just symbolical. Please come to the Church to receive Christ truly - not thanks to your emotions or a good preaching but receive Him truly to your heart, knowing that He is truly with you. That He makes you truly holy as He is holy.
I AM THE DOOR: by Me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
John 10, 9
So Jesus is a Door, right?
How can we explain it?
A being who's a literally DOOR!
Because we are living in a time where people can become anything the want I'd like to become a broom and sweep everything that is not normal in this world away.
The manna in the desert given to Ancient Israel was a symbol of the Eucharist.
Why would Our Lord come in the Flesh, suffer and die, Rise Bodily from the dead, and give us another symbol. ?
Thanks God I'm Catholic Christian Amen 🙏🏻✝️🙏
First of all you belong to the Roman Catholic Church (RCC).
Make your homework and study why and since when there is "Roman".
Thanks God that he called me out from a man made institution that initiated Inquisition, Crusades, Forced Conversions, Colonialismn, Counterreformation, Reeducation Centres and many other unbiblical teaching and practice.
Nowhere Jesus taught to ...
... combat heresy
... spread/share the Gospel
... convince people
... with VIOLENCE.
Stop your denomination thinking. Everybody who believes in Jesus and obey Him belong to the real church.
New Covenant Whole Gospel: How many modern Christians cannot honestly answer the questions below?
Who is the King of Israel in John 1:49? Is the King of Israel now the Head of the Church, and are we His Body? Who is the “son” that is the “heir” to the land in Matthew 21:37-43? Why did God allow the Romans to destroy the Old Covenant temple and the Old Covenant city, about 40 years after His Son fulfilled the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 in blood at Calvary?
What the modern Church needs is a New Covenant Revival (Heb. 9:10) in which members of various denominations are willing to re-examine everything they believe and see if it agrees with the Bible, instead of the traditions of men. We need to be like the Bereans. It will be a battle between our flesh and the Holy Spirit. It will not be easy. If you get mad and upset when someone challenges your man-made Bible doctrines, that is your flesh resisting the truth found in God's Word. Nobody can completely understand the Bible unless they understand the relationship between the Old Covenant given to Moses at Mount Sinai and the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. What brings all local churches together into one Body under the blood of Christ? The answer is found below.
Let us now share the Old Testament Gospel found below with the whole world. On the road to Emmaus He said the Old Testament is about Him.
He is the very Word of God in John 1:1, 14. Awaken Church to this truth.
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1 (Gal. 3:16)? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel (John 1:49)? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? What did Paul say about Genesis 12:3 in Galatians 3:8, 3:16? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis?
Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, man-made Bible doctrines fall apart.
Let us now learn to preach the whole Gospel until He comes back. The King of Israel is risen from the dead! (John 1:49, Acts 2:36)
We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant church of Mount Zion and the blood in Hebrews 12:22-24.
1Jn 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
1Jn 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1Jn 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.
God is not now a “racist”. He has extended His love to all races of people through the New Covenant fulfilled by His Son’s blood at Calvary. The Apostle Paul warned against using “genealogies” in our faith in 1 Tim. 1:4, and Titus 3:9.
The following verses prove the Holy Spirit is the master teacher for those now in the New Covenant.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Mar 1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
1Jn 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
Watch the RUclips videos “The New Covenant” by David Wilkerson, or Bob George, and David H.J. Gay.
All "born-again" believers in the New Covenant Church are a part of the "priesthood" in 1 Peter 2:4-10. We have one High Priest in the New Covenant, and His name is Jesus. This passage reveals the Spiritual temple made up of those who accept Christ as the "chief cornerstone".
.
Beautiful
Thank you❤
Eucharistic Miracles PROVE that the Euchsrist is the REAL BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST.
Catholic so take Jesus’s presumably real body every week. If it is real body why take it every week? Shouldn’t it be enough to take it once because it is real body? So taking it every week means the previous intake was not enough to give them what it is meant to give?
I attended a Protestant university and had the same problem with interpretation, especially in regards to who had the authority to interpret Scripture objectively. Martin Luther took that authority from Jesus' Church (Mt 16:18-19, more verses most Protestants claim are not to be taken literally) and gave it to the individual. I think history bears out the truth that this action, legitimizing subjective interpretation, was devastating to Truth itself, and Christian unity as a consequence.
Greek had a few words for chew/eat. The Greek term Jesus used in John was “Trogon” which is defined as a graphic chewing or gnawing. Using less masticating goes words for eating indicates literal rather than symbolic.
"This is a hard saying, who can hear it?..."
Protestants can't.
So let me get this, the idea is, we are actually taking the flesh and blood of christ at the Eucharist? Like his literal flesh and blood?
Yes
@@JDcatholicEngageDo you know were the words Hocus Pocus come from? Jesus died once, To think that on Sun-Day, millions of priest around the world transformed the host into Christ body is laughable.
Revelation 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls having a golden cup in her hand full of abomination and filthiness of her fornication.
The Pope wears purple scarlet and gold colors
@@JDcatholicEngage if this was in fact the case why didn’t he then give them his actual blood and flesh? Since he was there? He also asked his disciples to do this in rememberence of him meaning it would be a recurring activity ? He also followed OT law to the letter which forbade drinking blood, so how to get around this
@@JDcatholicEngage going by that we can also assume we ate a vine and a door. Because he said he was those things as well. I ask the same question. Why did he not give flesh if that was his intended message? At the supper.
Well Jesus also says the flesh counts for nothing the flesh is no help at all. Guess I just take that literally.
Sorry for your lack of discernment
Thank goodness we don't have to choose, by I'll invite you down this hypothetical tangent with me:
If you had to choose between a cracker of unleavened bread, and a gulp of wine,
or the the Word of the Living God: The Holy Scripture; the Bible.
Which would you choose?
The problem is the hyper focus on the metaphysical and not remembrance through the action. The bread and wine IS Christ. Scripture just never clarifies how and in what sense directly because the point is not the substance but the action. Rome has become obsessed with the substance and has forgotten the action. And worse, this has created several generations of fallen away Catholics who focus on their faith in their faith rather than keeping their eyes directly on Jesus.
John 6 is in support of your very point.
Premise the chapter with John 6:26 in mind. Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves.”
(Jn. 6:40) “For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”
(Jn. 6:54) “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
According to this parallel, beholding and believing (v.40) are equated with eating and drinking Christ’s flesh (v.54). This is further paralleled by verse 35:
(Jn. 6:35) I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.
(Jn. 6:54) “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
To “hunger” and “thirst” and parallel to the one who “eats” and “drinks.” But note what Jesus says satisfies our hunger: “He who comes to Me… he who believes in Me.”
Jesus isn’t speaking about his literal flesh and blood any more than he is speaking about literal bread (Jn. 6:35) or literal water (Jn. 4:10-14). Indeed, Jesus uses the term sarx for his “body,” rather than the common term sōma (which was the common term used in the Lord’s Supper). Indeed, the “term ‘flesh’ is never used in the NT to refer to the Lord’s Supper.” Hence, this seems “to caution against a sacramental or eucharistic understand of these verses.” This is why Augustine of Hippo wrote regarding this passage: “Believe, and you have eaten.”
He’s real
This is common among Catholics converting from Protestantism
I was member of the Roman Catholic Church and Jesus called me out 35 years ago. Now I belong to the real church of Christ = ECCLESIA.
John 3,16
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
John 8
31Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
John 14,6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
1Joh 1,9
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
John 14,23
Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.
The problem is the hyper focus on the metaphysical and not remembrance through the action. The bread and wine IS Christ. Scripture just never clarifies how and in what sense directly because the point is not the substance but the action. Rome has become obsessed with the substance and has forgotten the action. And worse, this has created several generations of fallen away Catholics who focus on their faith in their faith rather than keeping their eyes directly on Jesus.
If there is no Eucharist, there is no life. I have my huge experience
It is not literally the body and blood of Christ but symbolic is the wrong word. We must treat it as if it is literally Christ's body and blood or we fail to connect with Jesus. Treating it as a mere symbol is not enough. Does that make sense?
238. Q. What is the Holy Eucharist?
A. The Holy Eucharist is the Sacrament which contains the body and blood, soul and divinity, of
our Lord Jesus Christ under the appearances of bread and wine.
Thank you brother
In John chapter 6, Jesus said he was the bread sent down from heaven. He said he will give his flesh to eat and his blood to drink. He compared his flesh with the manna the Israelites ate in the wilderness.
He didn't compare his flesh as every word that proceed from the mouth of God.
Eating his flesh does not mean eating his words (teachings) and coming to him does not mean drinking his blood. Protestants tries very hard to twist scripture without any fear of offending Jesus Christ
IT'S SIMPLE! At the Last Supper, Christ did NOT say "Eat of this bread, for it is LIKE UNTO my flesh, and drink of this wine for it is LIKE UNTO my blood..." "Eat of this bread for it IS my flesh, and drink of this wine, for it IS my blood..." The wine and host are NOT representative. They are ACTUAL. In Christ's Own Words!
So when Jesus says “I am the living bread” we should take that literally and believe that Jesus was actually made of bread. Got it 🫡
Flew right over your head.
Jesus said: “My people, I have given you My very Body and Blood at every Mass when you receive Holy Communion. When the priest consecrates the host and wine, they are transubstantiated into My Body and My Blood. My Eucharistic gift enables Me to be with you all of the time in My tabernacle, and in the monstrance at Adoration. I thank all of My faithful who visit Me in Adoration hours. My Blessed Sacrament is powerful in helping you spiritually and physically. You also have seen Eucharistic miracles when blood appears on the consecrated Host. You have visited Lanciano, Italy and Los Teques, Venezuela where such Eucharistic miracles have appeared. These miracles were given for those people who do not believe that My Real Presence is in each consecrated Host.”
The answer to your question is YES!
Jesus says His "sheep" knows His voice. When you follow Christ completely like a sheep, that's when your spiritual life is mature. Until then, know that goats do the opposite - goat do what they want, not what the Master says.
Tuesday, April 9, 2024:
Jesus said: “My people, I talked to Nicodemus about being ‘born again in the spirit’, which is like coming out of the darkness into the light. You had this same experience yesterday when the eclipse of the sun by the moon brought darkness and then the light of the sun returned. You are usually baptized as an infant, and you become a member of My Church. When you receive the sacrament of Confirmation, you receive the Holy Spirit, so you are born in the spirit. When the apostles received the tongues of fire on Pentecost, they received all of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. I also breathed upon them to receive the Holy Spirit as well. It was this courage and other gifts that gave the apostles the spiritual strength to spread My Good News to the people in all of their missionary travels. My faithful have also received the sacrament of Confirmation so you are blessed to share My Good News of My Resurrection with those people you are evangelizing. Reach out to make new members in My Church by converting souls to faith in Me.”
@@tellthetruth6430 you just said yes to Jesus being made out of literal bread. This is why no one takes you seriously.
Not sure if others have mentioned it but, a question I would have for our Protestant brothers and sisters is if they believe God is capable of turning the Altar bread into the flesh of our Lord. I would hope they say God is capable of anything. Then He is capable of transubstantiation where we eat his body and drink his blood, in order to follow the COMMANDMENT that Jesus gave us where he stressed that if we do not, we will not have life. And he does this miracle without making us fall into the sin of cannibalism. Just like the disciples in Scripture thought, I might add. I would also remind them that Paul said not to receive Holy Communion unworthily because then it would be a sin upon us. And the reason for that is because Jesus' flesh and blood are holy. There are also the miracles that have happened throughout the centuries where the Host turns into bleeding flesh and the Blessed Blood that looks and tastes like wine, turns into actual blood. And are still with us today as living flesh and blood. Lastly, you look at what the enemy of mankind, the Devil and his demons, do through their worshippers when they steal the Eucharist for their Black Masses. They know it is real and want to desecrate our Lord's body.
Gen 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman Mary/Church)....The battle goes on, but the head of the serpent will be crushed.
Rev 12 the woman (Mary/church) is at war with the dragon which is described as having 7 heads (splintered groups signifying protestantism) . Rev 12:4 With its tail descendants/followers of the reformers) it hurled a third of the stars(members of the Church) to the ground (protestantism). Read for your self the entire chapter.
Symbol has weak connotations many times. I would call it metaphor, which is what jesus spoke to the jews always ( parables ). In this gospel of john where he said it he was speaking to desciples and non desciples alike. this means he spoke in parable. the fact the many found his saying was harsh, if for the same reason Nicodimus did not understand how he could be born again.
Even if we consider the eucarist to be litteral, then what is the process by which the wine we drink becomes the blood the christ? if we do not know but say it is a divine transmutation, then ok, but what is the difference between this and a metaphor where believers perform the metaphor themselves by taking the literal and converting it into spritual. this is exactly what the divine transmutation does. turning the wine into the blood of christ, the spiritual blood of christ. The issue is not the blood itself but the grace, forgiveness and eternal life that it holds. All these are already inherent in the holy spirit. all these are recieved and discerened spiritually.
metaphor is the language of the spirit. That is how Jesus communicated and this is how christ is communicating thorugh the holy spirit. The Eucarist like any religious ceremony is an ellaborate metaphor, whose aim is to affirm and relive spritual truths and realities. faith makes it real. If through litteralism or metaphor you recieve and relive those spiritual truths, then the goal is reached. If symbolism does not work for you then look at it litterally. If looking at it litterally does not work then look at it as a metaphor. As long as we live those spiritual truth, and manage to dwell for a few moments more in the kingdom of god.
You're wrong. Jesus explains His parables to the Apostles in private. He never explained this one, only affirmed again and again that this bread is His body and this wine is His blood. He always affirmed that, always. There's no single Church Father that teaches otherwise, especially among Apostolic Fathers. If people who were taught by the Apostles themselves affirmed that core of the Faith is believing in the Real Presence of Christ in bread and wine then how can Protestants even defend their position? They can't.
@@PrzybyszzMatplanety read all the parables he did not explain all.
@@user-sh6ou7mj5i That's your answer? You think you can get away with ignoring Church Fathers taught by Apostles and historical testimony?
@@PrzybyszzMatplanetylet's talk about liturgy. What is the purpose of any liturgy? Let's compare that to the word of god. Either is dead if they are not discerned spiritually. The letter kills, but the spirit gives life. It's the same with liturgy. If I cannot live the spiritual truth of god through liturgy, it becomes dead to me. Some people live this truth by perceiving liturgy literally. Some live this Truth by perceiving liturgy as metaphor.
The law of god is : love god and love neighbour. All the laws of Moses were signifiers to these two commandments. Also all the Hebrew liturgy was meant to lead to these two commandments.
Church fathers had pastoral responsibilities, which are not similar to the responsibilities of an apostle (witness of christ jesus). In their responsibilities they needed to develop liturgy as well. However, their purpose should converge with purpose of the apostles: testify to the glory of the father through Christ Jesus.
@@user-sh6ou7mj5i Dude, we're not talking about liturgy here. We're talking about deposit of faith given by the Apostles to their first students. And this deposit is simple: bread and wine in Eucharist becomes literaly body and blood of Jesus Christ of whom Apostles were witnesses of. The Apostles believed they meet Jesus each time they're breaking bread as He commanded them to. That's their faith. Why you reject it as symbolic? Why try to say Apostolic Church Fathers twisted Apostles teachings for pastoral reasons? They did not, bread and wine ARE His body and His blood and that was the Church faith from the beginnings, because that's what the Apostles witnessed and taught.
Excellent!
Hi admin, could you please speak a little bit slower? 🙏🙏
The sad story is you take the Eucharist more importantly that living a Christ Like life...my salvation is based on Faith as we can see in all these verses how you are saved by faith and grace(Acts 16:32, John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 11:6, Romans 10:9, Galatians 2:16, Ephisians 1 :13, Philipians 3:9 ) im a Follower of Christ and you should all be tooo..narrow is the gate that leads to heaven and whe i see that Catholic gate
.....doesnt seem narrow to me
The problem is the hyper focus on the metaphysical and not remembrance through the action. The bread and wine IS Christ. Scripture just never clarifies how and in what sense directly because the point is not the substance but the action. Rome has become obsessed with the substance and has forgotten the action. And worse, this has created several generations of fallen away Catholics who focus on their faith in their faith rather than keeping their eyes directly on Jesus.
You clipped out the intro to make it sound like Eva was saying the Eucharist is just a symbol, when just before that she said "Protestants say that..."
Shut down, must be your favourite verb in English 😂
Pls prove to me tht it's the real presence
Okay. Did Jesus say, "This represents my body..."? No. Jesus said, "This is My Body..." and for over 1,500 years, no one dared to say, "No, it isn't."
Believe comes from undertaking, not vice versa, try infamous Faith alone!
If you don’t believe in His Presence, investigate Eucharistic miracles, signs from God with AB blood type & living heart tissue.
@@randycarson9812 if it is the real presence done by a pedophile why is it tht it cannot be the real presence by other churches. Who gives the RCC the sole authority to claim this. N don't forget, all the tests done on the eucharist may not be of god. The devil also does miracles.
@@geoffjs the devil also can do miracles just like Fatima n Lourdes apparitions.
@@dannyboy6598 Many miraculous healings have occurred at Lourdes, and 70,000 people witnessed the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima. If this is how Satan tries to confuse people, his house cannot stand (cf. Matthew 12:24-26).
Run from anyone who uses the phrase leap of faith. We don't leap into what is not believed but what is revealed.
PROTESTANTS DO NOT BELIEVE IN INDIVIDUAL INTERPRETATION. I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU GOT THAT FROM. WE WHO SPEND EVERYDAY, WHITH OUT FAIL READING THE KING JAMES BIBLE AND PRAYING OUR HEARTS CONTENT TO JESUS CHRIST WHERE,AT NO TIME WE REPEAT OVER AND OVER AGAIN, LIKE THE PAGANS DO. WE SPEAK WITH OUR LORD IN A CONVERSATIONAL TONE, WHERE WE GET ANSWERS, SOMETIMES VERBALLY FROM THE HOLY SPIRIT. ID BEEN READING EVERYDAY, & STAYING IN PRAYER, ALSO WATCHING CHRISTIAN T.V., BECAUSE I WANTED TO LEARN, AND FIGURE WHAT,EVERYONE SEEMED TO KNOW ABOUT GOD, BUT DIDN'T FEEL I DID ANYWAY, 4 YRS GO BY, AND IM LEARNING A LOT, BUT I THOUGHT GOD,/ HOLY SPIRIT WOULD ONLY SPEAK TO PEOPLE WHO WERE PRACTICALLY PERFECT, LIKE POPE,S AND,NUNS AND REALLY GOOD PEOPLE. EVEN THOUGH STUDY I FEEL IN LOVE WITH JESUS CHRIST BUT, I WOULD STILL SIN FROM TIME TO TIME. WHILE READING I SPOKE A QUESTION OUT LOUD. NOT EXPECTING ANY ANSWER. BUT I RECEIVED ONE. YOU COULD HAVE KNOCKED ME OVER WITH A FEARHER. THE LORD DOES SPEAK TO HIS CHILDREN. I ONLY WISH SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TOLD ME THIS SOONER. PEOPLE HAVE TO DRAW CLOSE TO JESUS CHRIST ON A EVERY DAY BASES, NOT MISSING A DAY OF READING THE WORD, AND TALKING TO OUR GOD . HE WILL THEN START TO SPEAK BACK TO YOU. IT FEELS WONDERFUL BECAUSE YOU CAN FEEL THE POWER O.F THE HOLY SPIRIT SWEEP OVER YOU. IT FEELS LIKE LIQOUD LOVE FLOWING OVER YOU, FROM HEAD TO TOE. ANYONE'S WHOSE EVER FELT IT
KNOWS ITS THE HOLY SPIRIT AT WORK, SHOWING HIS LOVE TO HIS CREATION.
😂😂, PROTESTANTS, CALL JESUS CHRIST IS A LIAR. 40000+ WORTHLESS DENOMINATIONS😂😂. HOLY SPIRIT IS ONE WITH GOD, HOW CAN HE LEAD YOU To 40000+ DIFFERENT TYPES OF TRUTH??????.
Beautiful ❤
@@user-kf4zh5qm8z 40000+ WORTHLESS PROTESTANTS DENOMINATIONS. 🤣🤣🤣, HAS THE HOLY SPIRIT, DIVIDED ITSELF?🤣🤣
40000+ WORTHLESS PROTESTANT DENOMINATIONS.🤣🤣🤣. HAS THE HOLY SPIRIT, DIVIDED ITSELF🤣🤣
God isnt the author of confusion, man is!!!@@dennis26091985
The eucharist is the body of Christ.
Do you believe the Bible? If the road are with honey and milk it does not actually mean that. 😂
Babe.
It’s not symbolic, it’s magic.
the eucharist denies that Christ's death on the cross was sufficient alone for salvation. the roman catholic church implies that both faith and salvation are added through the eucharist, and in fact missing the mass/eucharist is a mortal sin possibly punished by hell. this totally denies the real sacrifice of Christ.
Here is something that I thought about. I'm not saying I'm smart or something. It might have been thought of before. I believe the reason Jesus didn't explain himself even though many of his followers walked away was because it wasn't the Passover yet. He was going to replace the tradition of the old with the new.
Jesus died once. You are killing him every time