Catholics Visiting The Baptist Forum Part 2

So, what happens to "Jesus" when Catholics' bodies process all the nutrients out of the Jesus cracker and it becomes waste? Do they believe the waste is Jesus, too?

 

Yeah, I get that you think you gave us examples, but I wasn't referring to the verses you think were examples, but to the source for examples you insist he show you.

[edited to read: You are taking these verses out of context]

Yes, we all do.

 

It remains the Body and Blood of Christ as long as the appearances of bread and wine exist.

Once they are ingested and go down into your stomach – the appearances of bread and wine no longer exist.

The same thing happens with everything you eat and drink.
Didn’t you ever take a biology course??

 

He switched EYE FOR AN EYE . He switched murder to just looking at one with hatred. He switched adultery with just looking at someone with lust.

This is common sense, You state he is being symbolic. Well then tell us of what, what is the symbolism, And it doesn't hold up for something where 100% of your DISCIPLES have a problem with it and 96% choose to leave.

I bet even in your own congregation the symbolism has never been a 96% deal breaker, There is nothing disagreeable from sugar coating what Jesus Christ actually said.

Is it a deal breaker in the Catholic church? INDEED look where you are! It is troublesome. Even the ridicule is plenty of times word for word "HOW COULD JESUS ACTUALLY GIVE US HIS FLESH AND BLOOD?"

52Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?”

You sound EXACTLY LIKE THEM!

 

Even this command is not completed by you. He directs exactly how to be remembered. But you chose different means -->scripture.

We do communion on the command Jesus said do this. Its the on going command. We do it for the same reason those in the bible do communion.

You do not share the same reason. You don't do it because Jesus says nor because the church does it, but because the bible reports the church doing it you are but a mere mockery a wannabe of the real deal.

 

So then it's not really Jesus, it's just bread and wine.

Yes, I did. That's why I'm not a moron who believes Jesus is a cracker.

 

1 Corinthians 11

29For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.

Then you fail to judge the body rightly, only judging it to be bread.

Or take this as a challenge, give us an example one one who doesn't judge the body.

 

Not what the text says.

 

Jesus used metaphor. Jesus did not say that the bread was actually His body or what was in the cup was actually His blood. There was language to use, which is not metaphor, which was not used.

 

Where? Nowhere is pouring used for the immerision (baptism) in the New Testament.

Also you did not answer my two questions.

 

So am I to understand that you admittedly deny the sole Apostolic authorithy of the New Testament documents.

 

TRANSLATION:
"I asked for Scriptural proof - and all you could give me was . . .Scriptural proof!"

My point exactly . . .

 

Can you point me to the post where I made this claim?

 

FALSE.

I showed you where pouring is prescribed in the FIRST century document, The Didache.

On the other hand, YOU can't show me ONE Biblical example of full immersion Baptism . . .

 

You're being dishonest again. You didn't ask for scriptural proof. You said:

You asked for the words of men, not the word of God.

You've claimed it, but you haven't shown it.

Don't care if they did. We get our doctrine from scripture, not from what other people do.

You can insult me all you like, and the moderators can let you get away with it all they like, but the bottom line is that your pagan, child molesting cult cannot save you.

 

I never said Jesus was a “cracker”.
I said that the “cracker” is the Body of Christ.

If a doctor removed your appendix and held it up – are YOU now an appendix??
NO – that appendix is part of YOU.

Try to stay focused here . . .

 

Yes - I'm showing you that your Protestant understanding of the Eucharist is a 16th century invention.

The Early Church unanimously held to the Catholic position . . .

 

Roman Empire
Perhaps you don't know history.

 

You made clam from an early second century document The Didache for non immerion immersion. Not a genuine Apostolic document.