"Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." (Matthew 11:28-30)
"Wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." - Saint Ignatius of Antioch." Don't kid yourself. The Catholic Church and the Christian Church are two different things.
I’ve never heard of this metabolizing into Jesus, I’ve always believed that it the bread and wine was turned into His Body and Blood though. The way that this man explained it just blew my mind!!!! 😳
@TOTSY.MUSIC.LIST.1944 I suggest you search on UA-cam for: "Miracles of the Eucharist", particularly the one of Buenos Aires which involved the future Pope Francis, then Bishop Bergoglio. God bless.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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). don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
It would blow my mind too. It could not have been cannibalism or else there would be loads of scripture about them getting ill, sick and stressed out. So we know for a fact it wasn't that. It was infused with the Holy spirit, which is God. So that's how He could say it's His body.
Thank you for this spiritually enriching input about the Eucharist & how sacred the Early Christians received this. We pray Catholics will do the same, if they have this input.
I finally realized the entire point of the new covenant is to get people into the church, His Church, His body of which he's the head. One head of one body! He lived, was crucified and raised to establish, with authority for His Father, and leave on earth, His one church with authority. He didn't do all that to leave the apostles with a pocket New Testament to pass out. The Church birthed the New Testament letters, they did not precede the church! And being united in His body (The Church) which is always united in the Father
@@aaabbb-py5xd No problem. I already knew a lot of this material, since it is part of the deposit of the Apostolic Faith we have received from the Apostles. But I did like: 1) the letter to the Ephesians where the Eucharist is called the medicine to immortality and anti-dote to death. Mind-blowing how many times I have read/heard that and didn't reflect on its deeper significance to the Real Presence as we understand it. 2) how the natural process of us taking food which is not us (ie. bread, meat, milk, etc.) it becomes part of us (an arm, an eye, a muscle, etc.). Jesus does the same to plain bread miracuously at the eucharist so we may eat His Flesh and drink His Blood and have eternal life within us. 3)What truly unites us as Catholics is not common belief (though it helps), BUT more importantly te more often we receive the Eucharist, Jesus is actually consuming us and we are becoming a part of His body, just as the food we eat becomes a true part of us. Non-caths are missing out on such a unique relationship with our God. 4) Jesus often described the heavenly banquet as a marriage banquet. That our union with Him was akin to a marriage, Him the Groom, we the Bride. It makes so much sense that within the Eucharist we get the joining of two flesh into one. This only makes real sense if two bodies are involved in reality; not just symbolic. That was just a few amazing insigts I can recall off-hand.
@angelacartland3867 Angela, The "unsaved" are resurrected with their human bodies and their condemned souls united to them for eternity Those who died in Grace and their souls are in Heaven, at the end of times their glorified bodies are resurrected to be united with their saved souls, just like Jesus showed us. God bless.
@@joecastillo8798 Thanks Joe, but that much I kind of already knew. I meant, how in the light of Joe's talk, with the redeemed receiving what is necessary for resurrection through the Eucharist, which the unsaved either have not received or received unworthily, the unsaved too are resurrected?
@@angelacartland3867 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). don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
quote---This makes perfect sense but my question then is, how are the unsaved also resurrected? unquote Revelation 20:11-15 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds.r >>>>Revelation 20:5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. >>>John 5:29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. >>>Daniel 12:2 Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt. --After the 1000 years, the wicked will be resurected.
Take, eat, and take, drink, and do this in memory of me. Seems simple to me. One meal prior to His sacrifice the next day. In private, for His apostles only. Telling them not to forget Him, because they were to spread the word.
since the eucharist was not even fully practiced until the 12th century, or later, what with the "early church fathers (not scripture)" have to do with anything relevant here?
Definitely an interesting way of undercutting the notion that the Eucharist is merely a symbol. The early Church had very specific ideas about the effects of the Eucharist.
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). don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
@@mitchellosmer1293 Why do you comment as if I and others have not heard these weak/fallacious Protestant arguments before? The opposite of spirit/spiritual is NOT literal. The Holy Spirit is not mere metaphor. What was the unbelief that Jesus exposed? Their unbelief in Him AND His words about His flesh and blood being true food and drink that MUST be eaten and drunk. What was the "hard saying" of Jesus the disciples referred to? His flesh and blood being true food and drink that MUST be eaten and drunk. A mere symbolic meaning would not be a hard saying. Are you exposing your own unbelief in this hard saying of Jesus? How can you possibly know the meaning of the gospel of John better than Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus?? According to early historical sources, Ignatius was ordained by the Apostle Peter, was a disciple of the Apostle John, and was the 2nd bishop of Antioch after Peter the Apostle and Evodius. Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John. Your misinterpretation of Jn 6 doesn't have a leg to stand on, either from the text itself or the historical successors of John.
@@mitchellosmer1293 Actually when Jesus says it is 'spirit and life' then He means it LITERALLY and not symbolically. That is why He also said 'It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail;' So eating mere bread, or even symbolic bread does NOTHING. That is why the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus under the appearance of bread and wine so it can truly do what it signifies. That is how Apostolic Christians believed direct from the Apostles. Your interpretation only began with other un-believers in Luther, Calvin, et. Al.
@@39knights 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). don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL. -John 6:35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.--unquote Obviously you have NO understanding of that verse!!!! READ IT AGAIN!!! "he who comes to Me will not hunger"- his body "he who believes in Me will never thirst.-"--His blood!!! Whomever FOLLOWS Jesus will NOT hunger--due to His words!!! Whomever BELIEVES in Jesus will NOT THIRST--due to His words!!! Early church leaders knew nothing of transubstantiation. The eucharist hardly makes any exegetical since to start with. Tradition cannot be the will of God if it goes against the word of God. Jesus uses parallelism in this discourse to equate believing with eating his flesh. Note the parallel between verse 40 and verse 54: (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: >>>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.” (Bread and wine) *****Did all those whom Catholics quote so much lie???? *******(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.” >>Jesus works in metaphor’s, analogy and hyperbole. In Mark 8 Jesus uses bread language again anhesd calls out those confused thinking he’s being literal not realizing the spiritual message. ----So, by your reckoning, Jesus comes down to earrh for every communion and cuts up His body, then drains hIs blood for all. Right??? ----
The question of whether or not Jesus received his own body and blood is not definitively settled. St.Jerome, in the 5th century, said “The Lord Jesus Christ, Himself the guest and banquet, is both the partaker and what is eaten.” Thus, many Catholic theologians feel Christ received His own body yet differently from the rest of us who benefit from this sacrament spiritually. Obviously Christ did not need to receive the increase in grace, which we receive in the Eucharist today.
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). don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
@@clivejames5058 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).
all of the early church fathers believed in it? you didn't employ the roman catholic apologist practice of taking part of what a church father wrote, and ignoring the rest?
Early church fathers knew nothing of transubstantiation. The eucharist hardly makes any exegetical since to start with. Tradition cannot be the will of God if it goes against the word of God. Jesus uses parallelism in this discourse to equate believing with eating his flesh. Note the parallel between verse 40 and verse 54: (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.”[4] Hence, this seems “to caution against a sacramental or eucharistic understand of these verses.”[5] This is why Augustine of Hippo wrote regarding this passage: “Believe, and you have eaten.” Jesus works in metaphor’s, analogy and hyperbole. In Mark 8 Jesus uses bread language again anhesd calls out those confused thinking he’s being literal not realizing the spiritual message. The catholic reasoning system will have little influence on the born again believer who’s truly born of the spirit. Those like my self who exegete and derive revelation from the spirit see the heretical lie of transubstantiation. 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.”
@@fantasia55 what do you mean? Luther? Luther never questioned transubstantiation. The reformation wasn’t about that. Transubstantiation was a heresy later discovered after people started reading the Bible. And reading scripture is a Torah tradition. You might think to yourself who has the right to interpret scripture. Well, believers in Christ have every right to interpret scripture. Torah tradition encouraged all Jews to read. Holy scripture. So with the New Testament, it’s suddenly too hard to read? Seriously? I can’t think of a single book in the New Testament harder to read than Leviticus, numbers, Genesis, Isaiah, I mean, the list goes on. So you have to ask yourself, either the church became stupid and it’s congregants lost the ability to read or the church is wrong. Given the dark ages, perhaps a little bit of both? Lol. When the new testament was written, it was written during a time, when Jews were fluent in the Torah and were multilingual. Today we don’t have that, but Jews of the time, including Rome knew Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. It is only the church today that is commonly limited to one singular language, that we suddenly think who has the right to interpret or read such things. If anything, we’ve gotten dumb by comparison to the first church in terms of literature. So it’s one thing to say we don’t have the right to interpret scripture and it’s quite another thing to just admit to yourself that you’re dumbfounded by scripture. Ironically scripture talks about people like that. They are unbelievers because the god of this world blind them to the truth of scripture. Words of Paul
@@bobbyrice6847 The first Protestants are described in John 6, followers who left the Church rather than believe the Eucharist is the actual Body and Blood of Jesus.
@@fantasia55 not even,… as i show above. If I’m wrong, look up what I call out and prove me wrong. I’m open and I’m happy to listen and discuss cordially and kindly.
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). don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
JOHN6:54...WHOSO EATETH MY FLESH,AND DRINKETH MY BLOOD, HATH ETERNAL LIFE; AND I WILL RAISE HIM UP AT THE LAST DAY. IF JESUS LITERALLY MEAN TO EAT HIS FLESH AND DRINK HIS BLOOD WHILE HE WAS STILL ALIVE WHEN HE SAID IT??...WHO ATE JESUS FLESH AND DRANK HIS BLOOD WHILE HE WAS STILL ALIVE?????? NO ONE!! JESUS DIDN'T MEAN IT LITERALLY BECAUSE NO ONE ATE JESUS FLESH AND DRANK HIS BLOOD WHILE HE WAS STILL ALIVE!! VERSE 63..IT IS THE SPIRIT THAT QUICKENETH (GIVES ETERNAL LIFE) ;THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK UNTO YOU, THEY ARE SPIRIT AND THEY ARE LIFE (ETERNAL LIFE).VERSE 68..THEN SIMON PETER ANSWERED HIM,LORD, TO WHOM SHALL WE GO? THOU HAS THE "WORDS" OF ETERNAL LIFE. AND WE BELIEVE AND ARE SURE THAT THOU ART THAT CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD."THOU HAS THE "WORDS OF ETERNAL LIFE"."WORDS OF ETERNAL LIFE"..JESUS DIDN'T TELL THEM EAT MY FLESH AND DRINK MY BLOOD TO HAVE ETERNAL LIFE. ONLY THE "HOLY SPIRIT" GIVES ETERNAL LIFE,THE HOLY SPIRIT GIVES YOU ETERNAL LIFE.!! THE MAN-MADE EUCHARIST IS UNBIBLICAL,FALSE AND PAGAN...!!!! MATTHEW 24:23..THEN IF ANY MAN SHALL SAY UNTO YOU, LO,HERE IS CHRIST(THE EUCHARIST),OR THERE;BELIEVE IT NOT.THE EUCHARIST IS NOT CHRIST,NEVER WAS AND NEVER WILL BE CHRIST..!!
@@susand3668 Yes, Jesus is still alive,but not in the eucharist. A born believer in Jesus Christ has God in his fulness dwelling in him.Why eat him literally?!??
Dear@@lupelo8819, agreed, He dwells in our hearts. So why did He tell us that we meed to eat His Body and drink His Blood-- which He said in every Gospel (10 times in John) and in Paul's inspired firsy letter to the Corinthians. Or don't you believe in the Bible, that you have to close your eyes to the plain meaning? If you are invincibly ignorant, God will forgive you, I hope and pray. I would like you to get into Heaven. Let us pray for one another.
The Eucharist was for the Jews first, the disciples represented Israel, salvation is of the jews. Jesus the high priest who sacrificed himself for his own people.
The Eucharist is the so-called Christian service, ceremony, or sacrament commemorating the Last Supper, in which bread and wine are consecrated and consumed."Since the apostles were among the earliest members of the _true_ Christian church, *WHERE* in the Bible does it say they participated in a cannibalistic ceremony of literally eating Jesus' flesh and drinking his literal blood? Answer: *NOWHERE!!!* So, is there any evidence that the _true_ Christian church believed in such a sick cannibalistic ritual as the Catholic Eucharist? Absolutely not!
@@christinacastillon6439 Oh, so you say that 1 Cor. 10:16-21 and 11:27-30 say that the apostles participated in a cannibalistic ceremony of snacking on Jesus' literal body and blood? How sick of you, pal.
"Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." (Matthew 11:28-30)
"Wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
- Saint Ignatius of Antioch
"Wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
- Saint Ignatius of Antioch."
Don't kid yourself. The Catholic Church and the Christian Church are two different things.
I’ve never heard of this metabolizing into Jesus, I’ve always believed that it the bread and wine was turned into His Body and Blood though. The way that this man explained it just blew my mind!!!! 😳
@TOTSY.MUSIC.LIST.1944
I suggest you search on UA-cam for: "Miracles of the Eucharist", particularly the one of Buenos Aires which involved the future Pope Francis, then Bishop Bergoglio.
God bless.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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).
don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV
Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
It would blow my mind too. It could not have been cannibalism or else there would be loads of scripture about them getting ill, sick and stressed out. So we know for a fact it wasn't that. It was infused with the Holy spirit, which is God. So that's how He could say it's His body.
Can u guys release all the talks of the conference will be very helpful
Joe Heschmeyer is like pure GOLD!!!!!
Thank you for this spiritually enriching input about the Eucharist & how sacred the Early Christians received this. We pray Catholics will do the same, if they have this input.
Summary - you are what you eat.
I finally realized the entire point of the new covenant is to get people into the church, His Church, His body of which he's the head. One head of one body! He lived, was crucified and raised to establish, with authority for His Father, and leave on earth, His one church with authority. He didn't do all that to leave the apostles with a pocket New Testament to pass out. The Church birthed the New Testament letters, they did not precede the church! And being united in His body (The Church) which is always united in the Father
Would have been fine if popes hadn't messed with it.
@squizza28 how was that?
Really loved some of these insights and analogies I had not considered before.
Now list these insights please
@@aaabbb-py5xd No problem. I already knew a lot of this material, since it is part of the deposit of the Apostolic Faith we have received from the Apostles. But I did like:
1) the letter to the Ephesians where the Eucharist is called the medicine to immortality and anti-dote to death. Mind-blowing how many times I have read/heard that and didn't reflect on its deeper significance to the Real Presence as we understand it.
2) how the natural process of us taking food which is not us (ie. bread, meat, milk, etc.) it becomes part of us (an arm, an eye, a muscle, etc.). Jesus does the same to plain bread miracuously at the eucharist so we may eat His Flesh and drink His Blood and have eternal life within us.
3)What truly unites us as Catholics is not common belief (though it helps), BUT more importantly te more often we receive the Eucharist, Jesus is actually consuming us and we are becoming a part of His body, just as the food we eat becomes a true part of us. Non-caths are missing out on such a unique relationship with our God.
4) Jesus often described the heavenly banquet as a marriage banquet. That our union with Him was akin to a marriage, Him the Groom, we the Bride. It makes so much sense that within the Eucharist we get the joining of two flesh into one. This only makes real sense if two bodies are involved in reality; not just symbolic.
That was just a few amazing insigts I can recall off-hand.
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16)
This makes perfect sense but my question then is, how are the unsaved also resurrected? CCC 998, Jn 5:29.
@angelacartland3867
Angela,
The "unsaved" are resurrected with their human bodies and their condemned souls united to them for eternity
Those who died in Grace and their souls are in Heaven, at the end of times their glorified bodies are resurrected to be united with their saved souls, just like Jesus showed us.
God bless.
@@joecastillo8798 Thanks Joe, but that much I kind of already knew. I meant, how in the light of Joe's talk, with the redeemed receiving what is necessary for resurrection through the Eucharist, which the unsaved either have not received or received unworthily, the unsaved too are resurrected?
@@joecastillo8798 But it is certainly helpful to realise the condemned just get an ordinary body, I did not get that before. Blessings.
@@angelacartland3867 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).
don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV
Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
quote---This makes perfect sense but my question then is, how are the unsaved also resurrected? unquote
Revelation 20:11-15
Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds.r
>>>>Revelation 20:5
The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.
>>>John 5:29
and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.
>>>Daniel 12:2
Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt.
--After the 1000 years, the wicked will be resurected.
Take, eat, and take, drink, and do this in memory of me. Seems simple to me. One meal prior to His sacrifice the next day. In private, for His apostles only. Telling them not to forget Him, because they were to spread the word.
That was great.
since the eucharist was not even fully practiced until the 12th century, or later, what with the "early church fathers (not scripture)" have to do with anything relevant here?
Definitely an interesting way of undercutting the notion that the Eucharist is merely a symbol. The early Church had very specific ideas about the effects of the Eucharist.
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).
don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV
Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
@@mitchellosmer1293 Why do you comment as if I and others have not heard these weak/fallacious Protestant arguments before? The opposite of spirit/spiritual is NOT literal. The Holy Spirit is not mere metaphor.
What was the unbelief that Jesus exposed? Their unbelief in Him AND His words about His flesh and blood being true food and drink that MUST be eaten and drunk.
What was the "hard saying" of Jesus the disciples referred to? His flesh and blood being true food and drink that MUST be eaten and drunk. A mere symbolic meaning would not be a hard saying.
Are you exposing your own unbelief in this hard saying of Jesus? How can you possibly know the meaning of the gospel of John better than Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus?? According to early historical sources, Ignatius was ordained by the Apostle Peter, was a disciple of the Apostle John, and was the 2nd bishop of Antioch after Peter the Apostle and Evodius. Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John.
Your misinterpretation of Jn 6 doesn't have a leg to stand on, either from the text itself or the historical successors of John.
@@mitchellosmer1293 Actually when Jesus says it is 'spirit and life' then He means it LITERALLY and not symbolically. That is why He also said 'It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail;' So eating mere bread, or even symbolic bread does NOTHING. That is why the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus under the appearance of bread and wine so it can truly do what it signifies.
That is how Apostolic Christians believed direct from the Apostles. Your interpretation only began with other un-believers in Luther, Calvin, et. Al.
@@39knights 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).
don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV
Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
-John 6:35
Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.--unquote
Obviously you have NO understanding of that verse!!!!
READ IT AGAIN!!! "he who comes to Me will not hunger"- his body
"he who believes in Me will never thirst.-"--His blood!!!
Whomever FOLLOWS Jesus will NOT hunger--due to His words!!!
Whomever BELIEVES in Jesus will NOT THIRST--due to His words!!!
Early church leaders knew nothing of transubstantiation.
The eucharist hardly makes any exegetical since to start with.
Tradition cannot be the will of God if it goes against the word of God.
Jesus uses parallelism in this discourse to equate believing with eating his flesh. Note the parallel between verse 40 and verse 54:
(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:
>>>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.” (Bread and wine)
*****Did all those whom Catholics quote so much lie????
*******(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.”
>>Jesus works in metaphor’s, analogy and hyperbole. In Mark 8 Jesus uses bread language again anhesd calls out those confused thinking he’s being literal not realizing the spiritual message.
----So, by your reckoning, Jesus comes down to earrh for every communion and cuts up His body, then drains hIs blood for all. Right???
----
During Last Supper Jesus ate bread or his body, b4 or after consecration?
The question of whether or not Jesus received his own body and blood is not definitively settled. St.Jerome, in the 5th century, said “The Lord Jesus Christ, Himself the guest and banquet, is both the partaker and what is eaten.” Thus, many Catholic theologians feel Christ received His own body yet differently from the rest of us who benefit from this sacrament spiritually. Obviously Christ did not need to receive the increase in grace, which we receive in the Eucharist today.
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).
don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV
Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
@@clivejames5058 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).
all of the early church fathers believed in it? you didn't employ the roman catholic apologist practice of taking part of what a church father wrote, and ignoring the rest?
Early church fathers knew nothing of transubstantiation.
The eucharist hardly makes any exegetical since to start with.
Tradition cannot be the will of God if it goes against the word of God.
Jesus uses parallelism in this discourse to equate believing with eating his flesh. Note the parallel between verse 40 and verse 54:
(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.”[4] Hence, this seems “to caution against a sacramental or eucharistic understand of these verses.”[5] This is why Augustine of Hippo wrote regarding this passage: “Believe, and you have eaten.”
Jesus works in metaphor’s, analogy and hyperbole. In Mark 8 Jesus uses bread language again anhesd calls out those confused thinking he’s being literal not realizing the spiritual message.
The catholic reasoning system will have little influence on the born again believer who’s truly born of the spirit. Those like my self who exegete and derive revelation from the spirit see the heretical lie of transubstantiation.
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.”
Jesus let the first Protestants leave his Church rather than say the Eucharist is merely a symbol.
@@fantasia55 what do you mean? Luther? Luther never questioned transubstantiation. The reformation wasn’t about that. Transubstantiation was a heresy later discovered after people started reading the Bible. And reading scripture is a Torah tradition. You might think to yourself who has the right to interpret scripture. Well, believers in Christ have every right to interpret scripture. Torah tradition encouraged all Jews to read. Holy scripture. So with the New Testament, it’s suddenly too hard to read? Seriously? I can’t think of a single book in the New Testament harder to read than Leviticus, numbers, Genesis, Isaiah, I mean, the list goes on. So you have to ask yourself, either the church became stupid and it’s congregants lost the ability to read or the church is wrong.
Given the dark ages, perhaps a little bit of both? Lol.
When the new testament was written, it was written during a time, when Jews were fluent in the Torah and were multilingual. Today we don’t have that, but Jews of the time, including Rome knew Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. It is only the church today that is commonly limited to one singular language, that we suddenly think who has the right to interpret or read such things. If anything, we’ve gotten dumb by comparison to the first church in terms of literature.
So it’s one thing to say we don’t have the right to interpret scripture and it’s quite another thing to just admit to yourself that you’re dumbfounded by scripture. Ironically scripture talks about people like that. They are unbelievers because the god of this world blind them to the truth of scripture.
Words of Paul
@@bobbyrice6847 Early Christians were unanimous about the Eucharist being the Body and Blood of Christ. They argued about everything except that.
@@bobbyrice6847 The first Protestants are described in John 6, followers who left the Church rather than believe the Eucharist is the actual Body and Blood of Jesus.
@@fantasia55 not even,… as i show above. If I’m wrong, look up what I call out and prove me wrong. I’m open and I’m happy to listen and discuss cordially and kindly.
Do you people want get lost by denying the Eucharist of our Lord.or
Do you want say our Lord is a liar
God forbid
Come Home to Jesus Chrit
He asks , Jesus does, that we gnaw on his body & drink his blood . Gnaw on his body so that we fully grasp onto his word , the life & the Trinity.
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).
don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV
Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [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. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
@@mitchellosmer1293 Seems like a common error. Spirit doesn't mean nonliteral
JOHN6:54...WHOSO EATETH MY FLESH,AND DRINKETH MY BLOOD, HATH ETERNAL LIFE; AND I WILL RAISE HIM UP AT THE LAST DAY. IF JESUS LITERALLY MEAN TO EAT HIS FLESH AND DRINK HIS BLOOD WHILE HE WAS STILL ALIVE WHEN HE SAID IT??...WHO ATE JESUS FLESH AND DRANK HIS BLOOD WHILE HE WAS STILL ALIVE?????? NO ONE!! JESUS DIDN'T MEAN IT LITERALLY BECAUSE NO ONE ATE JESUS FLESH AND DRANK HIS BLOOD WHILE HE WAS STILL ALIVE!! VERSE 63..IT IS THE SPIRIT THAT QUICKENETH (GIVES ETERNAL LIFE) ;THE FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK UNTO YOU, THEY ARE SPIRIT AND THEY ARE LIFE (ETERNAL LIFE).VERSE 68..THEN SIMON PETER ANSWERED HIM,LORD, TO WHOM SHALL WE GO? THOU HAS THE "WORDS" OF ETERNAL LIFE. AND WE BELIEVE AND ARE SURE THAT THOU ART THAT CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD."THOU HAS THE "WORDS OF ETERNAL LIFE"."WORDS OF ETERNAL LIFE"..JESUS DIDN'T TELL THEM EAT MY FLESH AND DRINK MY BLOOD TO HAVE ETERNAL LIFE. ONLY THE "HOLY SPIRIT" GIVES ETERNAL LIFE,THE HOLY SPIRIT GIVES YOU ETERNAL LIFE.!! THE MAN-MADE EUCHARIST IS UNBIBLICAL,FALSE AND PAGAN...!!!! MATTHEW 24:23..THEN IF ANY MAN SHALL SAY UNTO YOU, LO,HERE IS CHRIST(THE EUCHARIST),OR THERE;BELIEVE IT NOT.THE EUCHARIST IS NOT CHRIST,NEVER WAS AND NEVER WILL BE CHRIST..!!
Dear @lupelo8819, Jesus is still alive, Ask Him.
@@susand3668 Yes, Jesus is still alive,but not in the eucharist. A born believer in Jesus Christ has God in his fulness dwelling in him.Why eat him literally?!??
A born again believer has God in all his fulness dwelling in him.Why eat him?!?
Dear@@lupelo8819, agreed, He dwells in our hearts.
So why did He tell us that we meed to eat His Body and drink His Blood-- which He said in every Gospel (10 times in John) and in Paul's inspired firsy letter to the Corinthians. Or don't you believe in the Bible, that you have to close your eyes to the plain meaning?
If you are invincibly ignorant, God will forgive you, I hope and pray. I would like you to get into Heaven. Let us pray for one another.
Sorry but the Eucharist is real and it is Jesus Christ
The Eucharist was for the Jews first, the disciples represented Israel, salvation is of the jews. Jesus the high priest who sacrificed himself for his own people.
The Eucharist is the so-called Christian service, ceremony, or sacrament commemorating the Last Supper, in which bread and wine are consecrated and consumed."Since the apostles were among the earliest members of the _true_ Christian church, *WHERE* in the Bible does it say they participated in a cannibalistic ceremony of literally eating Jesus' flesh and drinking his literal blood? Answer: *NOWHERE!!!*
So, is there any evidence that the _true_ Christian church believed in such a sick cannibalistic ritual as the Catholic Eucharist? Absolutely not!
1 Corinthians 10:16-21
1 Corinthians 11:27-30
@@christinacastillon6439 Oh, so you say that 1 Cor. 10:16-21 and 11:27-30 say that the apostles participated in a cannibalistic ceremony of snacking on Jesus' literal body and blood? How sick of you, pal.
No you say cannibalism here.
Just like the Pagan Romans and some Jews and athiests great company you have there.
Jack Chick anybody?
@@cbooth151 Pretty cringe to phrase it this way. No one is arguing that. Must be nice to just make stuff up and then make it sound ridiculous.
@@thundersmite2162 Many Catholic beliefs are ridiculous.