Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Transubstantiation

0 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

Hi everyone. Catholics believe in transubstantiation or the "real presence" of Christ in the Eucharist or communion. What is wrong with this belief? Please explain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


Hi everyone. Catholics believe in transubstantiation or the "real presence" of Christ in the Eucharist or communion. What is wrong with this belief? Please explain.


Well, to begin with, we must first discuss the issue of the Crucifixion. Do you believe that Christ's offering on the cross was a once and for all experience, and that the sacrifice for our sins is now complete?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It isn't Biblical.

For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
(I Corinthians 11:26)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


Hi everyone. Catholics believe in transubstantiation or the "real presence" of Christ in the Eucharist or communion. What is wrong with this belief? Please explain.


Science alone refutes the doctrine of transubstantiation! Put it under a microscope and see if the wafer and wine miraculously transforms into the body and blood of Christ. Transubstantiation refuted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


Hi everyone. Catholics believe in transubstantiation or the "real presence" of Christ in the Eucharist or communion. What is wrong with this belief? Please explain.


Hebrews 6:6b ...seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Baptistgirl, if you can flipflop between doctrines and religions, you truly need to sort out what it means to be saved! Praying that the Lord would open your eyes to the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


Hi everyone. Catholics believe in transubstantiation or the "real presence" of Christ in the Eucharist or communion. What is wrong with this belief? Please explain.


Catholics believe in transubstantiation.
Lutherans believe in the "real presence," which is also unbiblical--just partial reformation.

I am that bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 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. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
(John 6:48-63)

Jesus is not a walking, talking loaf of bread. Neither is He a walking, talking, wooden door (John 10:9).

I'd quote all of John 6 if not for space considerations. Read it and look at the context. Over and over, they interpret Jesus in one way, and believe not. This is the same way in which the Pharisees murmured when Jesus said He would raise the temple in three days, but was talking about His resurrection, not a physical building. Sometimes Jesus used metaphors and things like that. The great thing is, Jesus interpreted the saying for us in verse 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.

He's not talking cannibalism, and the context isn't about the Lord's supper anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post




Well, to begin with, we must first discuss the issue of the Crucifixion. Do you believe that Christ's offering on the cross was a once and for all experience, and that the sacrifice for our sins is now complete?


Yes, I believe that the crucifixion was a once and for all experience and that the sacrifice for our sins is now complete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


Baptistgirl, if you can flipflop between doctrines and religions, you truly need to sort out what it means to be saved! Praying that the Lord would open your eyes to the truth.


I know that I need to stop flip flopping between doctrines and religions. And I know what it means to be saved. I know that I am saved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post




Yes, I believe that the crucifixion was a once and for all experience and that the sacrifice for our sins is now complete.


Ok, now, if the sacrifice of Christ was once and for all, what is the purpose of transubstantiation? Why does Christ need to be re-sacrificed as it were at the mass over and over again? Is Christ's sacrifice insufficient? Catholicism teaches that the Catholic Mass(where they practice their so-called Lord's Supper) is a means of salvation. Do you believe this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The first Lord's Supper was held when Christ was still alive and had shed no blood. Does that make them cannibals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The problem is that the Lord will always dwell into you. He doesn't comes when you eat the wafer and drink wine and leave your body as soon as you walk out of the church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post




Ok, now, if the sacrifice of Christ was once and for all, what is the purpose of transubstantiation? Why does Christ need to be re-sacrificed as it were at the mass over and over again? Is Christ's sacrifice insufficient? Catholicism teaches that the Catholic Mass(where they practice their so-called Lord's Supper) is a means of salvation. Do you believe this?


Well, if I understand their teaching correctly, they don't teach that Jesus is being re sacrificed but that His sacrifice is continual (transcends time) and is being re-presented to the people. I honestly don't think this teaching makes much sense personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The Catholic church teaches that Jesus is being RE-sacrificed on the altar as a bloodless sacrifice - that contradicts the Bible in two ways: Jesus finished the payment for sin once for all upon the cross and those who offer Him again do not know Him, and blood has always been necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The sheer fact that the RCC literally INSISTS that you are eating the REAL flesh of Jesus, and that you are drinking the REAL blood of Jesus - is totally pagan in its origins. Human sacrifices were quite common in pagan ritual and cannibalism was a common practice. They would sacrifice their first born children to what ever deity they chose, then eat them!

Transubstantiation is not merely a "remembrance" of the Lord's Supper as the scriptures teach, but goes on much farther to say that the Bread and the Wine actually BECOME the Body and Blood of Jesus and must be ingested by the worshipper before sins can be forgiven. Their Jesus is worshipped only as the First Born Child who is sacrificed and then eaten at every worship ceremony. Virgin Mary plays a far bigger role in the work of salvation than Jesus, since she is God's mother and rules as Queen of Heaven - she is the RCC intercessor for sins, while her son, the weak little pathetic effeminate long haired pasty complexion girly-man Jesus was the ritual sacrifice for sins. Pass the A1 please!

In the Old testament Jews would eat the lambs that were slain as a sin sacrifice. However when Jesus became the ULTIMATE sacrifice, we did not need to kill lambs any more. He was not ritualistically killed and eaten, either. To even IMPLY that is a pagan idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Yes indeed and if folks will take notice, the only time most Catholics acknowledge Jesus is at Christmas, Easter or Eucharist. They keep Jesus as a baby or a dead sacrifice. They know nothing of Him as Sovereign Lord of the Universe, Risen Coming King, etc. They spend their time praying to Mary and "St. Jude" and "St. Andrew" and all the other "saints".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


Yes indeed and if folks will take notice, the only time most Catholics acknowledge Jesus is at Christmas, Easter or Eucharist. They keep Jesus as a baby or a dead sacrifice. They know nothing of Him as Sovereign Lord of the Universe, Risen Coming King, etc.


Yes, that is sad. Praise the Lord that our Saviour grew up and died for our sins (paying the complete penalty our sins deserved), and that He arose again the third day, victorious over sin, Satan, and death!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


The sheer fact that the RCC literally INSISTS that you are eating the REAL flesh of Jesus, and that you are drinking the REAL blood of Jesus - is totally pagan in its origins. Human sacrifices were quite common in pagan ritual and cannibalism was a common practice. They would sacrifice their first born children to what ever deity they chose, then eat them!

Transubstantiation is not merely a "remembrance" of the Lord's Supper as the scriptures teach, but goes on much farther to say that the Bread and the Wine actually BECOME the Body and Blood of Jesus and must be ingested by the worshipper before sins can be forgiven. Their Jesus is worshipped only as the First Born Child who is sacrificed and then eaten at every worship ceremony. Virgin Mary plays a far bigger role in the work of salvation than Jesus, since she is God's mother and rules as Queen of Heaven - she is the RCC intercessor for sins, while her son, the weak little pathetic effeminate long haired pasty complexion girly-man Jesus was the ritual sacrifice for sins. Pass the A1 please!

In the Old testament Jews would eat the lambs that were slain as a sin sacrifice. However when Jesus became the ULTIMATE sacrifice, we did not need to kill lambs any more. He was not ritualistically killed and eaten, either. To even IMPLY that is a pagan idea.


Proof of this goes all the way back to Babylonianism, of which the RCC is the full embodiment. Way backin Hebrew history wicked kings would embrace the horrible pagan practices of this vicious cult and even sacrifice their own sons and daughters. In 2 Kings we find Manasseh (Hezekiah's son), king of Judah, making his son to pass thru the fire. <<<--(human sacrifice).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


The Catholic church teaches that Jesus is being RE-sacrificed on the altar as a bloodless sacrifice - that contradicts the Bible in two ways: Jesus finished the payment for sin once for all upon the cross and those who offer Him again do not know Him, and blood has always been necessary.


I am not trying to argue but do you have an official Catholic source that states this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


The Catholic church teaches that Jesus is being RE-sacrificed on the altar as a bloodless sacrifice - that contradicts the Bible in two ways: Jesus finished the payment for sin once for all upon the cross and those who offer Him again do not know Him, and blood has always been necessary.


I don't believe that's the official Catholic teaching Jerry. They see it as a re-presentation of Christ's sacrifice. Not a re-sacrifice. I've just looked it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Yeah, continuation of a single, perpetual sacrifice. Unbiblical heresy either way, but facts are always good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


Yeah, continuation of a single, perpetual sacrifice. Unbiblical heresy either way, but facts are always good.


Quite right. Either way, it's wrong. But I've also heard an IFB preacher teach something along these lines. That Christ had to be the one to die, because he was God, and as God he suffered the crucifixion eternally, and hell-fire eternally, in order to save us of our sins, otherwise we could not be saved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Transubstantiation is where the priest turns the wine and the host into what they believe to be the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ. They do this every Mass and it simply is not scriptural.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


Transubstantiation is where the priest turns the wine and the host into what they believe to be the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ. They do this every Mass and it simply is not scriptural.


I agree. It isn't scriptural. But to the uninformed, it may seem Biblical. Thing is, Jesus spoke in allegories and parables a lot. He said, "I am the door" once for example. That doesn't mean He was saying he was literally a wooden door. However, He is the door to Heaven. Jesus is the only way to Heaven.

John 14:6 KJV Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post


I am not trying to argue but do you have an official Catholic source that states this?


Yes, their Catechism, put out in 1994 by the Pope. If needed, when I have time I can try to find the specific sections that declare this - perhaps if you can find it online, you can search it yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites