Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Completely ridiculous. "Nope, you made that up."
Can a Christian lose their salvation
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
I don't understand. Peter says to the Circumcision (according to Dispensationalism, I'm just stating it plainly, not to fight, but to document)
But let none of you suffer as a murderer, a thief, an evildoer, or as a busybody in other people’s matters.
16 Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this matter.
Does that mean Christians can lose their salvation or not? Does that mean if they are ashamed when they suffer, that they will then lose their salvation? Is that what Peter is saying to them?
Just because there are different dispensations doesn't mean there aren't similarities between the two.
No, it doesn't mean Christians (today) can lose their salvation.
Notice how "Christian" is only used ONCE in the Bible outside of Paul's dispensational teachings, and this is it (ie, Acts 9 through Philemon)?
And the one time it's used by Peter, it's "AS a Christian."
With that being said, every believer post Christ's resurrection was a Christian, or at least, that's what I believe. HOWEVER, and that's a BIG "however," that DOES NOT mean that every Christian was in the Body of Christ. Keyword: "was." Once the Dispensation of the Kingdom Gospel died out, all new believers were both Christians AND members of the Body of Christ.
Peter said he will be saved (future) as they (non Jews) already are. When all of Israel shall be saved.
5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” 6 Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter.
8 So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Peter says this because their hearts were not purified by faith (believing). This all makes sense if you read the Bible in order (I know, it's long) and just believe it for what it says. If you skip over long sections, then try to interpret Matthew, you end up lost, like Gary K.
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”
Ask yourself if Peter being full of the Holy Ghost and being guided in what to do and say, (including executing people for trading with the Beast Acts 5), and he was given a great commission, why did the Lord Jesus Christ have to appear in Acts 10 and teach him something new. The minute you actually follow the Bible you see there are 2 sets of instructions. We can keep it simple and start with Exodus, and not even Abraham even though the covenant of circumcision was made with him, and see they were given very specific instructions in what to do and they were not to associate with the rest of the world.
They continued to do evil in God's eyes (the only ones that matter). He rendered judgment (490 years plus 7 ) on them and will punish them, then restore them. The 2 kingdoms will be reunited. The 4 gospels and early Acts continue this. What isn't there was the fact that he was dying in our place, for the sin of the world. This would be applied to all. The people of the world could still come to God, even though he said have no association with them, if they first blessed Israel.
When Israel continued to reject the Messiah, he turned his back on them, and saved the infidels by grace, to drive Israel to jealousy. No work of the law is good enough, but they still had to do it according to their everlasting covenant.
8 So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Peter says this because their hearts were not purified by faith (believing). This all makes sense if you read the Bible in order (I know, it's long) and just believe it for what it says. If you skip over long sections, then try to interpret Matthew, you end up lost, like Gary K.
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”
Ask yourself if Peter being full of the Holy Ghost and being guided in what to do and say, (including executing people for trading with the Beast Acts 5), and he was given a great commission, why did the Lord Jesus Christ have to appear in Acts 10 and teach him something new. The minute you actually follow the Bible you see there are 2 sets of instructions. We can keep it simple and start with Exodus, and not even Abraham even though the covenant of circumcision was made with him, and see they were given very specific instructions in what to do and they were not to associate with the rest of the world.
They continued to do evil in God's eyes (the only ones that matter). He rendered judgment (490 years plus 7 ) on them and will punish them, then restore them. The 2 kingdoms will be reunited. The 4 gospels and early Acts continue this. What isn't there was the fact that he was dying in our place, for the sin of the world. This would be applied to all. The people of the world could still come to God, even though he said have no association with them, if they first blessed Israel.
When Israel continued to reject the Messiah, he turned his back on them, and saved the infidels by grace, to drive Israel to jealousy. No work of the law is good enough, but they still had to do it according to their everlasting covenant.
The RCC "Bibles" have extra books for a reason. Like Macabees which directly contradicts what Jeremiah actually said. And the RCC says it is incomplete because they made the Bible under authority from God. The RCC claims God > Pope and RCC > Bible > the people.
The reason they do this is you won't find the RCC hierarchy in scripture. You find the people of the circumcision we call the Jews, and everyone else. And I am not rendering judgment on the Jews, merely stating what our creator said. My track record is no better.
That was the point of my post.Why would they "pay attention" to laws that they were not given?
Right Divider
Body part
Then you should make the point.
Any day now.
nikolai_42
Well-known member
It's been ages since I've been on - and I'm afraid I haven't read all 46 pages of the thread, so if this is a repeat offense, please forgive the repetition.
Ultimately, I think the answer is no - but there are probably a lot fewer people who are/will be saved than claim it.
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
I John 3:9
It is axiomatic that "you must be born again" to enter the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who is born of God - by definition - is saved and is kept from falling. However, there are some passages that make one wonder....
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.
Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.
These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
Jude 1:4-12
The description is clearly one of unrighteousness - but the context Jude gives it is first of all of Israel (people) having been saved from Egypt and THEN walking in unbelief and being destroyed. Next, he refers to angels who "kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation" with predictable results. The letter then makes a direct comparison as Jude says "likewise" - speaking about those who turn the grace of God into lasciviousness and deny Christ. And while the text certainly makes it clear that these people in no way resemble born again believers, the idea that they are "twice dead" only serves to bolster the implication that - like those who were saved out of Egypt and angels that belonged in heaven - these men were once "saved". At least in some sense of the word.
Revelation also has some difficult words. Here is the standard for those who will enter the Kingdom:
And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.
Revelation 21:27
So the bottom line is that one must be written in the Lamb's book of Life. This is no surprise since we've already read this:
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 20:15
Revelation 13:8 echoes that same sentiment. and we even read this:
The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
Revelation 17:8
But is that something set in stone? "From the foundation of the world" sounds pretty solid - however, could that simply imply that the name was never erased?
He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Revelation 3:5
This is phrased in the negative ("....will not blot out...") so is it possible that it is just a figure of speech to note that one is written in the book? Or can it be blotted out?
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Revelation 22:18-19
There it is in the positive sense as well ("...shall take away...").
Of course, there are also all those passages from Hebrews that are commonly used - and even the idea of "the sin unto death" from I John (the book I started this post with).
If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
I John 5:16-18
There again we see John saying what he said in chapter 3. And I suspect this passage, too, has been referred to in the thread. We can discuss if the sin unto death is physical or spiritual death - and maybe that's even a thread on its own. But what is the point of asking for life for someone who has not sinned unto death - if that is a physical death? If it isn't unto death, then asking for life...what sense does that make (for a physical death)?
We can know we have eternal life :
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
I John 5:13
But can it be lost? the scriptures in Jude and Revelation seem to hint strongly that it can. However, those that trust in Him will never be lost.
Ultimately, I think the answer is no - but there are probably a lot fewer people who are/will be saved than claim it.
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
I John 3:9
It is axiomatic that "you must be born again" to enter the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who is born of God - by definition - is saved and is kept from falling. However, there are some passages that make one wonder....
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.
Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.
These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
Jude 1:4-12
The description is clearly one of unrighteousness - but the context Jude gives it is first of all of Israel (people) having been saved from Egypt and THEN walking in unbelief and being destroyed. Next, he refers to angels who "kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation" with predictable results. The letter then makes a direct comparison as Jude says "likewise" - speaking about those who turn the grace of God into lasciviousness and deny Christ. And while the text certainly makes it clear that these people in no way resemble born again believers, the idea that they are "twice dead" only serves to bolster the implication that - like those who were saved out of Egypt and angels that belonged in heaven - these men were once "saved". At least in some sense of the word.
Revelation also has some difficult words. Here is the standard for those who will enter the Kingdom:
And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.
Revelation 21:27
So the bottom line is that one must be written in the Lamb's book of Life. This is no surprise since we've already read this:
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 20:15
Revelation 13:8 echoes that same sentiment. and we even read this:
The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
Revelation 17:8
But is that something set in stone? "From the foundation of the world" sounds pretty solid - however, could that simply imply that the name was never erased?
He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
Revelation 3:5
This is phrased in the negative ("....will not blot out...") so is it possible that it is just a figure of speech to note that one is written in the book? Or can it be blotted out?
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Revelation 22:18-19
There it is in the positive sense as well ("...shall take away...").
Of course, there are also all those passages from Hebrews that are commonly used - and even the idea of "the sin unto death" from I John (the book I started this post with).
If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
I John 5:16-18
There again we see John saying what he said in chapter 3. And I suspect this passage, too, has been referred to in the thread. We can discuss if the sin unto death is physical or spiritual death - and maybe that's even a thread on its own. But what is the point of asking for life for someone who has not sinned unto death - if that is a physical death? If it isn't unto death, then asking for life...what sense does that make (for a physical death)?
We can know we have eternal life :
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
I John 5:13
But can it be lost? the scriptures in Jude and Revelation seem to hint strongly that it can. However, those that trust in Him will never be lost.
For the circumcision, to whom those letters are sent, yes. You cannot lose eternal life, or it is not eternal. The Jews are looking forward to salvation as a nation, and restoration. We don't know who the remnant are that were saved by grace apart from Israel. It might be easier to guess who it isn't.
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Paul is very clear.
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. 18 And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.
Don't add to what isn't there. Paul says nothing about your behavior taking salvation from you. You are a slave to righteousness, instead of sin. Those in Christ cannot sin. You can do acts that are evil, but you have no sin. And in case you missed it, change your behavior. Because you are free from sin.
And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself. But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, “Do yourself no harm, for we are all here.” Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God.
Paul is very clear.
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. 18 And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.
Don't add to what isn't there. Paul says nothing about your behavior taking salvation from you. You are a slave to righteousness, instead of sin. Those in Christ cannot sin. You can do acts that are evil, but you have no sin. And in case you missed it, change your behavior. Because you are free from sin.
And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself. But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, “Do yourself no harm, for we are all here.” Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God.
nikolai_42
Well-known member
Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
Gal 6:7-8
Correct. And those of us in Christ have sowed the DBR and have called on his name. Therefore I will reap eternal life.
Right Divider
Body part
Read the entire passage. Paul is not saying eternal life comes by good works.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Not so much about Catholicism, but about Protestants. The narrator said that Protestants believe the Bible's authority is categorically comparable to the authority of the Church's officers in Catholicism (validly ordained bishops), but this is a category error. Catholicism agrees with Protestantism that the Scripture is the Word of God, and is therefore perfectly reliable and infallible, but to equate this authority of the Bible with the authority of Church officers, is to make a category error.
It is true that Catholicism believes only valid bishops have the authority (authority here means metaphysical spiritual power) to forgive mortal sins and confect the Eucharist, but Catholicism admits that others can exercise the spiritual power of casting out demons.¹ As far as infallibly interpreting the Word of God, Catholicism believes this spiritual power (the keys to the kingdom, the power to bind and loose along with the power to forgive mortal sins) is possessed by the bishops collectively, but is practically only ever exercised by the the pope himself, when he pronounces "ex cathedra" and defines dogma (which is doctrine gravely obligatory for Christians to believe). Really all Catholicism ever really claims the bishops possess however, with regard to the authority to interpret Scripture, is the content of the Apostolic teaching originating with the Apostles. Whenever popes authoritatively define dogma, they are only transmitting what the Apostles themselves taught, and not inventing new doctrine.
The office of the papacy (its powers) belongs to all the bishops. What this means is that the bishops collectively possess the political power to elect popes, and they also possess the political power to depose or remove popes. They also possess the political power to delimit the political power of the popes. iow the popes cannot assert new political powers for themselves unilaterally without the bishops' subsequent approval or consent. The office of the papacy is in the custody of the bishops collectively, as a college of bishops.
One minor quibble I have is the narrator's claim that Apostolic Succession applies to an unbroken chain of popes, but really it's the unbroken chain of validly ordained bishops. Every time a pope dies in office, the papacy is vacant, so this is not an unbroken chain. There have also been times when there was more than one pope, once there were even three, but no matter what's gone on with the papacy, the unbroken chain of bishops is what constitutes Apostolic Succession.
The other thing I disagree with is the reason given for why the Orthodox and Catholics divided; it wasn't over the Filioque clause (that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son), but it was because the Orthodox bishops (they are validly ordained in spite of the Schism) deny that the papacy is a distinct office from other, what they call, "patriarchates", such as the patriarchs of Jerusalem and Antioch and Constantinople. They just believe the pope is the patriarch /bishop of Rome, and only is traditionally thought of as "first among equals", rather than that the papacy is a distinct office from all other bishops and patriarchs (the papacy is not ontologically tied to the city of Rome, there was a period when the papacy was located in France for example). They believe the patriarchate of Rome has apostasized, which is their explanation for the split.
¹ Demons are metaphysically real, and the spiritual power to exorcise demons is also metaphysically real. Clearly therefore the power to cast out demons comes from God, as no man can inherently have this power, but the office of bishop is given this power by God, and so bishops can cast out unclean spirits, but it is because they are bishops, and not because of anything praiseworthy in themselves as men. That spiritual power is possessed by the office of bishop, and most exorcisms are performed by bishops or "exorcists" who minister under the authority of their bishop. But, some non-bishops, for example some Protestant pastors, can also exercise this spiritual power to cast out demons, but most of the time it is exercised by a bishop or by a bishop's exorcist. So it is not a power strictly exclusive to the office of bishop, unlike the spiritual power to forgive mortal sins and validly confect the Eucharist. (Nobody else can do that except bishops.)
Right Divider
Body part
Hilarious.
Derf
Well-known member
I had to look up "confect":
confect
verb [ T ] often disapproving
to create something, especially in a way that seems artificial or false:
So, are they validly creating a false thing, or does it just look like it's false, so it's deceptive?
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Seems like a nice Protestant (partisan) dictionary definition.
The confected Eucharist is the holy-of-holies and Who we're always kneeling toward at Catholic Mass. Kneel, kneel, kneel, kneel; all the kneeling is toward Jesus, or it's supposed to be anyway (there's some confusion out there about precisely what the kneeling's for, so you might see things incongruent with this explanation for genuflection (knee-bending) among actual Catholics at Mass, it's just because there's a lot of muscle memory among Catholic parents toward their children sometimes, and they hand on the faith not only intellectually but physically, and folk explanations for a lot of the devotions (such as genuflection or kneeling) have arisen, but they are not accurate and the only accurate reason for devotions is the explanations given by the founder of the devotion, if there is one, and these accounts are interpreted through the lens of originalism, meaning the words don't have any positive meaning at all just as such, but must cohere with the context in which the authors originally wrote or spoke them).
btw don't go to Mass unless you're escorted by a Catholic. Even if you're interested, just stay away. If you really want to check out the Mass, then you should instead go to Adoration, which is when Catholics, in a church or chapel, adore a fragment of reserved host (the host is what the bread is called, but we still call it host or the host when it's the Eucharist (the Eucharist is not real until the unconsecrated host is consecrated, this is the confection). At Adoration, the Eucharist is put in a monstrance, which is like an elaborate, exorbitant picture frame, but the picture in the frame is just a host, a circular cracker (wafers). The Eucharist doesn't have to be a wafer, it can be regular old bread, just as long as its ingredient list is specifically basic (like flour, water and salt, something like that), but the wafers or crackers are just efficient and convenient and valid.
And even though Jesus is God, He looked like a man. And we just think the same about the Eucharist. It's completely the same.
"This is My body," Jesus said, and, “51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread he will live forever; and for a fact, the bread that I will give is my flesh in behalf of the life of the world. ... Most truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I will resurrect him on the last day; 55 for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him. ... Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”
Last edited: