Cruciform
New member
Already decisively answered in Posts #52 and #55 above. If you come up with something new---something that hasn't already been corrected in a prior post---let me know. Until then, don't bother.
How Often Need Catholics Take Communion?
- Thread starter WeberHome
- Start date
Cruciform
New member
Come back if you ever manage to come up with an actual argument. :yawn:
Nanja
Well-known member
So be it!
The scriptures testify to the fact that the Choice was God's Eph. 1:4-11!
Rom. 9:21-23
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory
Dan. 4:35
And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?
Job 23:13
But he is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth.
~~~~~
WeberHome
New member
-
● John 6:53 . . Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
When I was growing up a young Catholic boy back in the decade of the 1950s, we were given the bread at communion, but never the wine. In other words; in accordance with the principles of transubstantiation; we ate Jesus' flesh without his blood.
Well; Jesus' recipe for "life within you" consists of both his flesh and his blood. Therefore, none of my communions counted because they were incomplete. I obtained no life from them: none of them; not a single one. I might just as well have used the host to make a peanut butter and jelly hor d'oeuvre for all the good it did me without the wine element.
It is not only necessary to include the wine element in order to obtain life, but it is also necessary to include it in order to attain to Jesus' resurrection.
● John 6:53 . . Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
So then, according to the principles of transubstantiation, I not only lacked eternal life due to my total, 100% lack of Jesus' blood; but my afterlife future was in grave peril too!
I was told that both species of the Eucharist-- the consecrated host and the consecrated wine --contain Christ's body and blood (a.k.a. real presence) so that either one alone will do the trick without the other.
Well; that might be what Rome says; but it's not what Christ preached.
1• Christ taught that his body is represented by the bread.
"While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said: Take and eat; this is my body." (Matt 26:26)
2• Christ taught that his blood is represented by the wine.
"Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying: Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins." (Matt 26:27-28)
According to the apostle Paul, when pew warmers leave one of the elements out of their communion service, they convey an incomplete gospel.
"For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes." (1Cor 11:26)
Paul didn't say "and/or" no, he said "and". Jesus also said "and" rather then "and/or".
Rome was not only seriously negligent back in the day, but also grossly incompetent. It couldn't even conduct something as simple and straight forward as the Lord's Supper without screwing it up.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
● John 6:53 . . Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
When I was growing up a young Catholic boy back in the decade of the 1950s, we were given the bread at communion, but never the wine. In other words; in accordance with the principles of transubstantiation; we ate Jesus' flesh without his blood.
Well; Jesus' recipe for "life within you" consists of both his flesh and his blood. Therefore, none of my communions counted because they were incomplete. I obtained no life from them: none of them; not a single one. I might just as well have used the host to make a peanut butter and jelly hor d'oeuvre for all the good it did me without the wine element.
It is not only necessary to include the wine element in order to obtain life, but it is also necessary to include it in order to attain to Jesus' resurrection.
● John 6:53 . . Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
So then, according to the principles of transubstantiation, I not only lacked eternal life due to my total, 100% lack of Jesus' blood; but my afterlife future was in grave peril too!
I was told that both species of the Eucharist-- the consecrated host and the consecrated wine --contain Christ's body and blood (a.k.a. real presence) so that either one alone will do the trick without the other.
Well; that might be what Rome says; but it's not what Christ preached.
1• Christ taught that his body is represented by the bread.
"While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said: Take and eat; this is my body." (Matt 26:26)
2• Christ taught that his blood is represented by the wine.
"Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying: Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins." (Matt 26:27-28)
According to the apostle Paul, when pew warmers leave one of the elements out of their communion service, they convey an incomplete gospel.
"For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes." (1Cor 11:26)
Paul didn't say "and/or" no, he said "and". Jesus also said "and" rather then "and/or".
Rome was not only seriously negligent back in the day, but also grossly incompetent. It couldn't even conduct something as simple and straight forward as the Lord's Supper without screwing it up.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
God's Truth
New member
I can tell you what Jesus says how you can decode.
God's Truth
New member
So then, how do YOU drink the blood of Jesus?
God's Truth
New member
So then, how do YOU drink the blood of Jesus?
WeberHome
New member
God's Truth
New member
I read those posts and cannot find how you drink Jesus' blood and eat his flesh.
We have to do those things to be saved.
It should not take more than one sentence telling me how you do it.
WeberHome
New member
God's Truth
New member
Is that what you believe too?
WeberHome
New member
God's Truth
New member
Just answer my questions here and now. If I would have understood what you wrote in those posts I would not be asking you questions about it.
Do you want to speak deeply with me, a person who wants only to discuss deeper than most?