biggest difference between Catholic and Protestant... Real Presence

[Meriweather]

So, Catholics are then cannibals?

Jesus said his body and blood will provide us nourishment, spiritual nourishment. Do you accuse a mother who provides her baby with nourishment from her body as introducing her baby to cannibalism? Or does that just apply to Catholics who reverently and joyously receive their nourishment from the body and blood of Christ?

You believe what Jesus said, but only up to a certain point?

 

[Cougarbear]

Jesus said his body and blood will provide us nourishment, spiritual nourishment. Do you accuse a mother who provides her baby with nourishment from her body as introducing her baby to cannibalism? Or does that just apply to Catholics who reverently and joyously receive their nourishment from the body and blood of Christ?

You believe what Jesus said, but only up to a certain point?

Does the baby eat the tit? Do you know what cannibalism is? Doesn't seem like it. We spiritually receive nourishment when partaking of the sacraments by accepting his atonement in our hearts and minds. Also, little babies can't sin. Adults can and certainly are if they are participating in cannibalism.

 

[Meriweather]

Does the baby eat the tit?

Is the baby fed and nourished by the mother's body? Can you comprehend how this can happen without accusing babies of cannibalism? If so, you should be able to comprehend Catholic belief without accusing Catholics of cannibalism. Shame on you if you cannot.

 

[zaangalewa]

I'm glad the baby is safe. So, Catholics are then cannibals? I really don't see verse 27 is saying the bread is turning into the flesh of Jesus Christ, literally by any means. In verse 35 He says come unto me for he is the bread of life. This still hasn't a bit to do with the Sacraments. The Sacraments are to do in remembrance of Him. It's really kind of sick to think every priest in the world minute by minute is pulling the great Christ off his thrown and making him die over and over. But, that's essentially what you are saying. Cannibalism.

Because of you, superidiot, I deleted a very long answer before I gave it.

 

[Cougarbear]

s the baby fed and nourished by the mother's body? Can you comprehend how this can happen without accusing babies of cannibalism? If so, you should be able to comprehend Catholic belief without accusing Catholics of cannibalism. Shame on you if you cannot.

From the Dictionary: can·ni·bal·ism - "The practice of eating the flesh of one's own species."
Now, is the mother's milk, flesh? No. Is the Catholic Priest's magic turning ordinary bread into the "flesh" of Jesus Christ, flesh? Apparently so according to your doctrine.

 

[Cougarbear]

Because of you, superidiot, I deleted a very long answer before I gave it.

From the Dictionary: can·ni·bal·ism - "The practice of eating the flesh of one's own species."
Now, is the mother's milk, flesh? No. Is the Catholic Priest's magic turning ordinary bread into the "flesh" of Jesus Christ, flesh? Apparently so according to your doctrine. So, please explain...

 

[Meriweather]

Now, is the mother's milk, flesh? No. Is the Catholic Priest's magic turning ordinary bread into the "flesh" of Jesus Christ, flesh? Apparently so according to your doctrine. So, please explain...

First, would you care to explain why you change the wording to "flesh" of Jesus Christ, when the words are, "This is my body." Does a mother nourish her child with her flesh or with her body? We believe Christ's words that he, too, can nourish us with his body.

If I understand correctly, you believe Jesus just wanted his followers to have a memory? That is fine, have a nice memory. I still think it rude to deliberately change another belief into something grotesque. What say you?

 

[zaangalewa]

From the Dictionary: can·ni·bal·ism - "The practice of eating the flesh of one's own species."
Now, is the mother's milk, flesh? No. Is the Catholic Priest's magic turning ordinary bread into the "flesh" of Jesus Christ, flesh? Apparently so according to your doctrine. So, please explain...

From a crossbow to a bald head: "Plopp".

 

[Clyde 154]

Catholics teach that when the bread is consecrated by the priest (rather by Jesus through the priest) it actually becomes Jesus

see John 6:27--- "Unless you eat my flesh... you have no life in you" (supernatural life)

Hosts are kept in the Church 24/7 (except on Good Friday)... where all can enjoy His tangible Presence
(only absolved Catholics can consume the Host)
Protestants do not believe in t his or if they do, they do not HAVE it because they do not have a valid priesthood to consecrate the host...

so I have heard that this is the biggest difference.. and also, I know this is so due to my own experiences. Once I was outside the Church... Now I am in... I have many complaints about all the new changes since Vat II... hate most of them.. but still... I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater

Valid Priesthood? All Christians are priests, they do not have to go through some selection/election process (1 Peter 2:5,9).

All members of the church are equals. (Gal. 3:28) (Col 3:11).

Jesus even prayed that all Christians should be ONE. (John 17:20-21)

Paul warned of time when there would be separation of the faith..........beginning with the church elders. (Acts 20:29-31). He called those people that would attempt to corrupt the faith "savage wolves......coming in among the flock".

 

[DudleySmith]

Clearly the Protestants rejection of Papal Authority and Vatican bureaucracy is the main difference. The split began over yet another Vatican scam to force people to pay for some ritual or other as part of a scheme to pay the Fuggers back a loan with interest, in league with the Holy Roman Emperor.

Conflict with Luther​

The ever-pressing financial undertakings of the papacy kept Leo X in constant need of new means of raising revenue. The wars with France, his lavish support of the arts, the construction of St. Peter’s, and a projected Crusade against the Turks all contributed to the financial needs of the papacy. One important source of revenue had long been the dispensing of indulgences (remission of the temporal penalty for sins) for money. During the reign of Julius II, indulgences had been authorized for financial contributions for the construction of St. Peter’s. Leo, who was very much interested in continuing this work, reaffirmed the indulgence shortly after his ascent. Nevertheless, because of its unpopularity in northern Europe, based primarily on economic reasons, it was not until early in 1517 that Johann Tetzel, a Dominican friar, actually began to preach the indulgence in the archdioceses of Mainz and Magdeburg in Germany. In response to this preaching, Martin Luther circulated his Ninety-five Theses.

Leo X - Reformation, Luther, Papacy

Leo X - Reformation, Luther, Papacy: The ever-pressing financial undertakings of the papacy kept Leo X in constant need of new means of raising revenue. The wars with France, his lavish support of the arts, the construction of St. Peter’s, and a projected Crusade against the Turks all...

www.britannica.com

Martin Luther and the Peasants`War

www.dokumentarfilm.com

This opened the door to other disputes as the revolt moved on. This is where all the absurd bullshit about how many millions the Catholics killed started,here and in the laughable 'Enlightenment' era where no smear against Christians from pseudo-intellectual fashion victims was too absurd to repeat as fact.

In any case, sects like the Baptists, Methodists, and others technically aren't 'Protestants', since they are themselves revolts against the Protestant sects of the Church of England and the Lutherans and Calvinists, more like Protestant Protestants.

 

[Meriweather]

All Christians are priests

Yes. Baptism makes us all priests, prophets, kings. There is a special priesthood to which some devote their entire lives.

 

[Cougarbear]

First, would you care to explain why you change the wording to "flesh" of Jesus Christ, when the words are, "This is my body." Does a mother nourish her child with her flesh or with her body? We believe Christ's words that he, too, can nourish us with his body.

If I understand correctly, you believe Jesus just wanted his followers to have a memory? That is fine, have a nice memory. I still think it rude to deliberately change another belief into something grotesque. What say you?

Well, a body is flesh, blood and bones, is it not. It's the Catholic Church that believes the bread literally changes into the body of Jesus Christ which includes flesh. You tried to stir away from this by inserting some distraction about mother's milk. I didn't buy the distraction. So, back to the belief of Catholics. You claimed that cannibalism didn't have anything to do with the body of Christ when "body" includes flesh or meat. I defined cannibalism from the dictionary.
From the Dictionary: can·ni·bal·ism - "The practice of eating the flesh of one's own species." Now, is the mother's milk, flesh? No. Is the Catholic Priest's magic turning ordinary bread into the "flesh" of Jesus Christ, flesh? Apparently so according to your doctrine. So, please explain...
I agree that this is grotesque. Protestants and the LDS Church also agrees and thus we know the true meaning of the sacraments as remembrances of Christ's body and blood, not changing into His body and blood inside our bodies by some mystic priest's spell. So, what did I change? Nothing...
Transubstantiation – the idea that during Mass, the bread and wine used for Communion become the body and blood of Jesus Christ – is central to the Catholic faith. Indeed, the Catholic Church teaches that “the Eucharist is ‘the source and summit of the Christian life.’”
Transubstantiation from the Dictionary - "(especially in the Roman Catholic Church) the conversion of the substance of the Eucharistic elements into the body and blood of Christ at consecration, only the appearances of bread and wine still remaining." Grotesque for sure! And, wrong for sure! So, you see I didn't change the belief of anyone. In fact, most Catholics don't agree who don't go to Church. One poll says 63% of those who attend Mass weekly believe the Eucharist literally becomes the physical flesh, blood and bones of Christ. However, the entirety of the Catholics polled in a Pew research poll only one-third of Catholics actually believe this. - Just one-third of U.S. Catholics agree with their church that Eucharist is body, blood of Christ
So, if you don't attend Mass regularly then you may not believe this. But, the Catholic Priests, Arch Bishops, Cardinals and Pope certainly does. It's your doctrine.

 

[Clyde 154]

Yes. Baptism makes us all priests, prophets, kings. There is a special priesthood to which some devote their entire lives.

Book, Chapter and Verse concerning this special priesthood? There is only ONE high Priest, Christ Jesus. (Heb. 4:14-16)

What part of scripture do you fail to comprehend? "There is neither Jew nor Greek (gentile), there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs (equal) according to the promise." -- Gal. 3:28-29

There is one thing that keeps any human from obtaining such a "special" status as high priest. Because of His humanity (Son of Man), Jesus is able to sympathize with our weaknesses since He endured temptation like we do (Isa. 53, 67:7-9, Matthew 4:1-11). However, unlike us or anyone claiming to be our high priest on earth (Pope), he did not yield to sin." -- 1 Peter 2:22

If anyone claims they are without sin.........they are a liar and make Him a liar. -- 1 John 1:10

We are all priests and do not require any SPECIAL priest (other than Christ Jesus) to ask God for forgiveness, we requre the prayers of no 3rd person, living or dead. We do not pray to any mortal such as Mary........we do not pretend to baptize infants by sprinkling because an infant is sinless until he/she reaches the age of reason where they can comprehend the difference between good and evil, righteousness and unrighteousness.....law and the breaking of God's law, as sin is the breaking of the law (What law could any infant possibly be guilty of breaking?). There is no requirement for anyone to stay celibate.

There are no requirements that separate the clergy from the laity requiring the puffed up peakcock type religious garb worn by some. In Fact Jesus called the people of the Jewish leadership that wore such grab.........vipers/snakes/hypocrites who made prayer in front of the people for SHOW and PRIDE. (Matthew 24:4-5, Matthew 15:12-14, Matthew 23:15,17,23,24,27,28,33). All these passages condemn those who act just like the SPEICAL PREIESTS in the RCC

Simply present the book, chapter and verse that demonstrate any of the RCC tradition to be authorized by the Holy Spirit that inspired the Word of God. Concepts such as "original sin" "virgin Mary" "Mary mother of God must be worshiped".....infant baptism.....or sprinkling instead of actual submersion in water.

 

[Meriweather]

Well, a body is flesh, blood and bones, is it not.

Do flesh, blood, and bones always make up a living body?

 

[Meriweather]

Book, Chapter and Verse

Are you trying to change things up again? I am not interested in following you around the mulberry bush. This is nothing you need understand.

 

[Cougarbear]

Do flesh, blood, and bones always make up a living body?

Well, let's use an analogy. Cows are sent to the slaughter house. The slaughter house sells to the butchers. The butchers cut up the dead cows for sale. People buy the dead cows ready for barbequing. We then eat the cow that is obviously dead. Now, if we substitute people for the cows, we would be eating dead people. In cannibalism, the bodies of the people are dead before consumed. Christ's earthly body was dead. The Sacraments must therefore be changed into earthly flesh and blood for us to be able to eat and drink them according to Catholic Doctrine. However, Christ was resurrected never to die again. That's what resurrection is. So, the Catholic Doctrine cannot possibly be true. It's obviously false doctrine and most Catholics, including you, agree. Nevertheless, those who believe this doctrine to be true, are committing cannibalism spiritually.

 

[Meriweather]

It's obviously false doctrine and most Catholics, including you, agree.

It is not a false doctrine, and I certainly do not agree that it is a false doctrine, so speak for yourself.

I follow what Jesus said. He lost many followers because of what he said. They left and went their own way. I believe Jesus knew exactly what he was saying and that he can do as he says.

You don't. No problem. The Romans didn't believe him either, and as you do, call early Christian believers cannibals. The more things change, the more they remain the same, or so it is said.

 

[there4eyeM]

The entire interpretation of what Jesus said and did at the last supper has been reduced from its fullest meaning. In fact, claiming the bread and wine transform into Jesus' body actually demeans the obvious intention.
If Jesus truly is One with All, then All is Him. The bread and the wine and the sky and the air and all imagination is Jesus. He didn't say to celebrate occasionally eating his body. He literally said that every time one eats, it should be in the same memory of its being his "body". He didn't say it had to be prepared by anyone, either.

 

[Cougarbear]

It is not a false doctrine, and I certainly do not agree that it is a false doctrine, so speak for yourself.

I follow what Jesus said. He lost many followers because of what he said. They left and went their own way. I believe Jesus knew exactly what he was saying and that he can do as he says.

You don't. No problem. The Romans didn't believe him either, and as you do, call early Christian believers cannibals. The more things change, the more they remain the same, or so it is said.

So, you believe that the Eucharist is the literal body of Jesus Christ. That you eat the flesh of a human being. If you don't, then the Church's doctrine on this is false doctrine. You and I agree.
Oh, I agree Jesus Christ knew what he was saying. I totally agree with what he was saying. But, the Catholic Church perverse what he said. And, I believe that he gave us the sacraments to remember him by. Not that it became the literal body of Christ. Cannibalism, no. He did not teach that.

 

[Meriweather]

So, you believe that the Eucharist is the literal body of Jesus Christ. That you eat the flesh of a human being. If you don't, then the Church's doctrine on this is false doctrine. You and I agree.
Oh, I agree Jesus Christ knew what he was saying. I totally agree with what he was saying. But, the Catholic Church perverse what he said. And, I believe that he gave us the sacraments to remember him by. Not that it became the literal body of Christ.

Why don't you tell me your beliefs instead of what is wrong with my beliefs, which you do not state correctly to begin with.

There4eyeM gave us a beautiful rendition of his beliefs.