Protestant exclusion from RC communion

[WestminsterMan]

but does the RCC have an answer to how can the so called true Church of god on earth teaches a diffewrent/another/false gospel, denying others to enter the Kingdom in order to get saved?

Actually, that's pretty simple. They would say that you are "...teaching a different/another/false gospel, denying others to enter the Kingdom in order to get saved." Further, they can back it up from the historical record that your denomination is very young and hardly resembles the early church and it's practices of worship.

WM

 

[33ad]

To be able to receive communion or what they call the holy Eucharist

You must be catholic in union with Rome
Or
Believe in the "real presence" and be is risk of death

Also a catholic must not be in a state of mortal sin
Have eaten any food an hour before mass.

An eastern orthodox may have the Eucharist in a catholic church but his church would look at that act as separating them the the eastern orthodox. While for catholics they are not allowed to take the Eucharist in the orthodox church

As a someone who can't take the Eucharist you may walk up and cross your arms aross you chest so you don't have to wait in the pew by your self

Last month I went to a catholic mass with a friend who had never been he walked up and took the Eucharist not knowing it was no big deal.

I have been to over. 25 churches in the last 4 years learning different beliefs

 

[notadoctor]

true story

my non-RC aunt was at a Christmas Eve service with my cousin and his wife, who is Catholic, and they all went up to receive communion, my aunt started to dip the wafer in the wine cup and the priest snatched it out of her hand and said, " you only get one chance!" - she was humiliated, but it was a good teaching point for her two grandsons who know that she's a devout Christian, and who saw the whole event

 

[Bro. James]

"For by grace are you saved through faith and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, lest anyone should boast; for we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." Ephesians 2:8-10.

Salvation is of the Lord. Jesus paid all. Why do some crucify Jesus daily? He said, "It is finished."

Peace,

Bro. James

 

[Thinkingstuff]

"For by grace are you saved through faith and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, lest anyone should boast; for we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." Ephesians 2:8-10.

Salvation is of the Lord. Jesus paid all. Why do some crucify Jesus daily? He said, "It is finished."

Peace,

Bro. James

This is a falicious statement. Jesus isn't being crucified daily his one crucifiction it being re-presented. His completed act on the cross isn't in question. Everytime we recieve the Eucharist we are asserting the covenant. Much like the Jews did with Passover. Instead of eating the Lamb as they do for passover we eat the flesh of the Lord, our passover lamb as he commanded in John 6

I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”...“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. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

And we understand that the real presense and Jesus flesh as did Paul when he said.

For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.

 

[The Biblicist]

Why do the majority of Christians believe its not just bread
Catholics, orthodox, oriental orthodoxy, Lutheran, Anglican, Methodist and baptist don't if you take genisis literally you should take this passage literally

John 6:53
King James Version (KJV)
53*Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Because Christ predicted that the "MANY" would follow the wrong way (Mt. 7:13) while only the "FEW" would follow the right way (Mt. 7:14).

The profession of the "MANY" on judgement day will be the profession of Roman Catholics, a profession of faith in Christ - "Lord, Lord" plus their own good works "Have we not done many wonderful works IN THY NAME" and it to these "MANY" Jesus will respond, "I NEVER knew you".

 

[The Biblicist]

This is a falicious statement. Jesus isn't being crucified daily his one crucifiction it being re-presented. His completed act on the cross isn't in question. Everytime we recieve the Eucharist we are asserting the covenant. Much like the Jews did with Passover.

What you are saying is simply a lie! The Eucharist is presented as a "sacrifice" every mass from what begins as non-living material substance which become living through the witch doctors hocos pocus blessing so that the actual flesh and blood and life of Christ is being regenerated from dead material substance each and every time as a SACRIFICE on the altar. Hence, it is a REGENERATION of Christ and REDEATH of Christ being offered as a sacrifice at each and every mass.

However, the Scriptures teach that he offered up ONE SACRIFICE and died ONCE for all and is seated as our High Preist signifying the work is finished. However, the Roman Catholic Mass pictures the sacrificial work of Christ as NEVER finished but LITERAL Life out of death and redeath over and over again.

- Instead of eating the Lamb as they do for passover we eat the flesh of the Lord, our passover lamb as he commanded in John 6 And we understand that the real presense and Jesus flesh as did Paul when he said.

John 6 does not teach one single solitary thing about the Supper. Jesus makes it very very clear that he is defining faith in Christ in metaphorical terms of partaking of Christ as you would partake of drink and bread:

Jn. 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.

Jn. 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
48 I am that bread of life.

Jn. 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

This is so easy and so clear that only a spiritual blinded biased person would teach that Jesus was LITERALLY demanding they eat and drink of his body and flesh. His words are to be understood SPIRITUALLY not LITERALLY:

Jn. 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.Jn. 6:67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

Peter understood that Jesus was not speaking of eating his literal flesh and blood but partaking of him by faith in HIS WORD:

68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

He also realized exactly what those specific words of life were:


69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

Jn. 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

What you are saying is simply a lie!

Out of the two of us, I'm the Catholic. I know what my beliefs are.

From the Catachism

The Eucharist is the memorial of Christ's Passover, the making present and the sacramental offering of his unique sacrifice, in the liturgy of the Church which is his Body. In all the Eucharistic Prayers we find after the words of institution a prayer called the anamnesis or memorial. In the sense of Sacred Scripture the memorial is not merely the recollection of past events but the proclamation of the mighty works wrought by God for men.184 In the liturgical celebration of these events, they become in a certain way present and real. This is how Israel understands its liberation from Egypt: every time Passover is celebrated, the Exodus events are made present to the memory of believers so that they may conform their lives to them.

Therefore this statement

The Eucharist is presented as a "sacrifice" every mass from what begins as non-living material substance which become living through the witch doctors hocos pocus blessing so that the actual flesh and blood and life of Christ is being regenerated from dead material substance each and every time as a SACRIFICE on the altar. Hence, it is a REGENERATION of Christ and REDEATH of Christ being offered as a sacrifice at each and every mass

is hogwash. You don't even know what you are talking about when it comes to the Eucharist.

John 6 does not teach one single solitary thing about the Supper.

It certainly makes Jesus to be the true manna which btw was actually eaten.

Jesus makes it very very clear that he is defining faith in Christ in metaphorical terms of partaking of Christ as you would partake of drink and bread:

Jesus made it very clear he was being literal about eating his body in that 1) he used the word Trogo which means chew, or gnaw. And 2) by how he dealt with the disciples who left.

When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” ...After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him

Jesus doesn't then explain it to them as he does with other his teachings and his disciples didn't understand and then he said you got it wrong. He let them walk away.

He did not speak to them without a parable, but privately to his own disciples he explained everything.

and letting them walk away he says to the 12

So Jesus said to the Twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?”

 

[The Biblicist]

Out of the two of us, I'm the Catholic. I know what my beliefs are.

You know what Rome tells you to know - period. However, what Romes tells you to know is in direct contradiction of what the Scriptures reveal Rome's actual teaching really is in the light of definitive inspired scriptures.

Even in your quotations there is an admission that it is an "offering" and it is a REPEATED offering every mass. It begins with what Rome considers DEAD material which is brought to life by the hocus pocus witchery of Rome's priests. In the eyes of Rome dead material substances is made to become the LIVING CHRIST who is being literally cannibalistically digested in a feeding frenzy by Rome's deceived zombies.

It certainly makes Jesus to be the true manna which btw was actually eaten.

The manna that fell in the wilderness was not the Literal flesh and blood of Christ. It was literal manna. Christ was no more literally the manna than he is a "door" or a "vine" or a "light." Christ is using common metaphorical langauge and for those too dense to figure it out he spells it out repeated in John 6:35-36; 47-48; 64-65; 63; so that even Peter could understand it clearly (Jn. 6:68-69)

Jesus made it very clear he was being literal about eating his body in that 1) he used the word Trogo which means chew, or gnaw.

Give me a break! What food do you not chew? The bread had to be chewed and digested.

And 2) by how he dealt with the disciples who left. Jesus doesn't then explain it to them as he does with other his teachings and his disciples didn't understand and then he said you got it wrong. He let them walk away. and letting them walk away he says to the 12

He does explain it (Jn. 6:63-65) and Peter does understand it (Jn. 6:68-69).

This is the kind of abuse of scripture that Rome must do to teach its doctrines of demons.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You know what Rome tells you to know - period. However, what Romes tells you to know is in direct contradiction of what the Scriptures reveal Rome's actual teaching really is in the light of definitive inspired scriptures.

It can be seen that you are clearly reaching. Same tripe "Just because the church teaches this is what they believe they don't really don't believe it." Did the Jews get released from Egypt every Year during Passover or did they make present the day they were released from Egypt?

 

[The Biblicist]

It can be seen that you are clearly reaching. Same tripe "Just because the church teaches this is what they believe they don't really don't believe it." Did the Jews get released from Egypt every Year during Passover or did they make present the day they were released from Egypt?

Egypt worshipped many gods and believed many things about them and that they all really existed. Did they really exist? Or did they exist only in the deceived minds of Egyptians due to demonic teaching? The same is true of Rome and its teachings.

 

[targus]

The Eucharist is presented as a "sacrifice" every mass from what begins as non-living material substance which become living through the witch doctors hocos pocus blessing...

You label prayer as "witch doctors hocos pocus blessing"?

I remind you that we will be held accountable for every word that comes from our mouths.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

The manna that fell in the wilderness was not the Literal flesh and blood of Christ.

You obviously didn't understand what I said. I said Jesus was the real manna. Alwasy was. And since he is the real manna just like the manna in the desert he must be eaten in the Eucharist.

It was literal manna.

Jesus is literal manna. Didn't you know every physical thing has its basis in the spiritual? Else you're just like the gnostic. Material bad spirit good. But that isn't what the bible says. Jesus is also the literal Word of God.

Christ was no more literally the manna than he is a "door" or a "vine" or a "light."

Do you know of any other entry into the kingdom of heaven? Do you know of any other sourse by which we are nurished by God? Do you know of any other light that illumines the heart?

Christ is using common metaphorical langauge and for those too dense to figure it out he spells it out repeated in John 6:35-36; 47-48; 64-65; 63; so that even Peter could understand it clearly (Jn. 6:68-69)

And you drop the ball because you cannot understand that the spiritual is real more real than the physical. God told Adam that he would surely die when he ate of the fruit. Spiritualy he died immediately and his physicalness followed later. Man is not a living being without the Spirit so the spirit is more real than what you can sense with your five senses so a spiritual reality is reality indeed.

Give me a break! What food do you not chew? The bread had to be chewed and digested

Exactly all food you chew and Jesus is our Bread and that Bread is his Flesh.

He does explain it (Jn. 6:63-65) and Peter does understand it (Jn. 6:68-69).

So Jesus left Peter in ignorance? Jesus never does that he ensures Peter understood and obviously he did and you still fall on because of your gnostic tendancy to think material bad seperate from spiritual good. No. Everything in the universe has a spiritual root. Even the Laws of physics.

This is the kind of abuse of scripture that Rome must do to teach its doctrines of demons

You exemplify the kind of abuse that comes from being your own authority in interpreting the bible which is why there are 20 million different types of baptist 60,000 different types of protestants, etc.... everyone has his own interpretation because like the accusation made in the book of judges you guys "do what seems right in your own eyes."

 

[The Biblicist]

Did the Jews get released from Egypt every Year during Passover or did they make present the day they were released from Egypt?

Hebrews 10:1-4 demonstrates that the ceremonial laws were but a "shadow" or type. In a type you make "present" the theoretical truth (not the actual substance or reality) the type was designed to express. That is precisely why these types could "NEVER TAKE AWAY SINS." Hence, what the passover made "present" was not something that could literally remit sins but that is the spin you are attempting to place upon it.

Hebrew 10:4 repudiates your analogy between the Passover and the Supper. Indeed, if they are analogous as you claim in what they make "present" then it is certain that they do not literally make present the remission of sins as Hebrews 10:4 repudiates that idea. Hence, sacramentalism is repudiated by Hebrews 10:4 while a PICTURE or TYPE is being confirmed. Hence, what both the passover and supper make "present" is THEORETICAL TRUTH (which is the design of a type) not actual remission of sins.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Egypt worshipped many gods and believed many things about them and that they all really existed. Did they really exist? Or did they exist only in the deceived minds of Egyptians due to demonic teaching? The same is true of Rome and its teachings.

Typical Non-sequitur. Pharoah made himself a God with all authority and could interpret what ever he wanted however he wanted. The same is true with protestant majority.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Hebrews 10:1-4 demonstrates that the ceremonial laws were but a "shadow" or type. In a type you make "present" the theoretical truth (not the actual substance or reality) the type was designed to express.

Ha! Theology isn't theoretical. And Truth is real not Theoretical! That where you whole theology colapse. The faith is real. The truth is real. You may theorize many things but truth remains so. The fact is you cannot believe that Jesus would give of his body to make you whole and renew his covenant with you everytime you commune with him in a physical way. Your whole faith is based on intellectual assent and you just proved it.

 

[The Biblicist]

You obviously didn't understand what I said.

You obviously do not know the difference between a Metaphor and reality! Jesus is not LITERALLY manna anymore than he is LITERALLY a door. A literal door is made of WOOD or some other inanimate substance but Jesus is made of biological mass. This is the type of mental gymnastics required by Rome to teach its abominable demonic originated doctrines.

And you drop the ball because you cannot understand that the spiritual is real more real than the physical.

Just following the lead of Christ who said a "spirit" hath not "FLESH AND BONES" as you see I do. Christ did not believe your hocus pocus mental gymnastics. Spirits are real spirits but they are not real MATERIAL substance and that is the point Rome does not get. Instead, they must depart from Scriptures and the Holy Spirit to Greek philosophy to make the scriptures teach their doctrines of demons.

You exemplify the kind of abuse that comes from being your own authority in interpreting the bible which is why there are 20 million different types of baptist 60,000 different types of protestants, etc.... everyone has his own interpretation because like the accusation made in the book of judges you guys "do what seems right in your own eyes."

Give us a break. There is no more than 38,000 different denominations of all types of Christians and you are going to tell us there are over 20 million different types of Baptists? More Catholic imaginations.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Just following the lead of Christ who said a "spirit" hath not "FLESH AND BONES" as you see I do.

LOL misapplying scripture again. He was talking about a ghost when his disciples feared that he was one. The description of a ghost is that it isn't flesh and bones. But it exist non the less. Whereas flesh and bone cannot live without the spirit. Typical again of misapplication of scripture. God always operates with the incarnation principle which your theology leaves out because to you its just an intellectual exercise.

Give us a break. There is no more than 38,000 different denominations of all types of Christians and you are going to tell us there are over 20 million different types of Baptists? More Catholic imagination

purposeful exageration to make a point. Many different baptist many different protestants all do to their own differing interpretation. There is no unity among you save you all hate the Catholic Church. But that should be no basis of unity. Unity should be about love, or charity.

 

[The Biblicist]

Typical Non-sequitur. Pharoah made himself a God with all authority and could interpret what ever he wanted however he wanted. The same is true with protestant majority.

What in the world do you think your argument was? It was same in kind!

 

[Thinkingstuff]

What in the world do you think your argument was? It was same in kind!

It wasn't at all. You took the ghost passage out of context.