Zone1 Question for Christians.

[Meriweather]

As Catholics, you receive a piece of bread and some wine. You claim you eat human flesh and drink blood, yet no one reports such an experience. At what point does this miracle occur that you're not even aware of it happening?

I recommend you research this.

 

[hadit]

I recommend you research this.

I'm starting by asking you, our resident expert on things Catholic. I wouldn't ask that other guy, he doesn't seem to know much of anything. He seems to think if someone wants to share communion with a Catholic, he's demanding something. That's really odd.

 

[hadit]

Do you know what St. Paul said about that? He said they weren't just eating bread and drinking wine and that they needed to stop acting like they were just eating bread and drinking wine.

I sure do know what Paul said about it. He said we were not to be divided when we observe the Lord's supper. We were to wait for each other and share so no one goes hungry and no one gets drunk. Obviously, there were people gorging themselves in what was supposed to be a meal of remembrance.

Is that what you were referring to?

 

[Meriweather]

I'm starting by asking you, our resident expert on things Catholic. I wouldn't ask that other guy, he doesn't seem to know much of anything. He seems to think if someone wants to share communion with a Catholic, he's demanding something. That's really odd.

I have done the research, but not recently. One is a host that turned into the body and blood Jesus several centuries ago, and was preserved. There was another like it. The third centers on a host that had dropped on the floor so it was handled in the usual way of letting it dissolve in a glass of water. All three of these were investigated by modern science. All had the same three findings: The flesh was a muscle located deep in the heart. The blood type (which I don't recall offhand) was the same blood type. None were done to test the Lord.

As I explained in the other thread, this is a matter of faith. Catholics stuck closely with Apostolic tradition, and as I mentioned before, this belief, this very ceremony, had people accusing very early Christians of being cannibals. The miracle of the host changing in the hands of a priest (about a century later as I recall) has been known for ages.

If one does not have this specific belief/faith in the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharistic celebration, one is not in spirit and truth with our Lord. For Christians, not being along side in spirit and truth is (or should be) unthinkable. I see nothing wrong with Christians having a different celebration in memory of Jesus and the Last Supper. My best friend's father was a minister, and that is what they believed and celebrated--the memory. She and I both loved the Lord. She and I understood the beliefs of the other and held each with great respect. We go where the Holy Spirit leads us, and we both have faith that the Holy Spirit knows what he is doing in guiding each individual.

 

[hadit]

I have done the research, but not recently. One is a host that turned into the body and blood Jesus several centuries ago, and was preserved. There was another like it. The third centers on a host that had dropped on the floor so it was handled in the usual way of letting it dissolve in a glass of water. All three of these were investigated by modern science. All had the same three findings: The flesh was a muscle located deep in the heart. The blood type (which I don't recall offhand) was the same blood type. None were done to test the Lord.

Okay, then those who ate and drank it should have been able to easily determine that they were not eating bread and were drinking blood. Tell me how many Catholics today really smell and taste blood instead of wine and really chew on human muscle fibers instead of bread?

As I explained in the other thread, this is a matter of faith. Catholics stuck closely with Apostolic tradition, and as I mentioned before, this belief, this very ceremony, had people accusing very early Christians of being cannibals. The miracle of the host changing in the hands of a priest (about a century later as I recall) has been known for ages.

Does this happen today? GOING BY WHAT YOU SAID, the miracle occurred BEFORE it was consumed. Now, how can you insist it happens today if people look at the bread and see bread, drink the wine and taste wine? Have you ever looked at the bread and saw it was actually human tissue? If that much wine actually turned into blood in every communion service, the church should smell like a slaughterhouse. It does not, because the wine stays wine and the bread stays bread.

See, you cite something that happened what, two or three times in human history? If it actually happened that way and is supposed to happen in every communion service, something has gone very wrong in the Catholic church because it's not happening now. If it happened the way you say it did, we should be seeing human flesh and tasting human blood today and we are not, unless you tell me you are, in which case I have some other questions for you. Also, Paul had some strong words about the Lord's Supper in which some went hungry while others got drunk. Again, if they were consuming flesh and blood instead of bread and wine, drunkenness would not have happened. You don't get drunk on blood.

If one does not have this specific belief/faith in the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharistic celebration, one is not in spirit and truth with our Lord.

Do you eat human flesh and drink human blood or is it a matter of faith, believing you are while understanding that you really are not? IOW, if you taste and smell wine, you're not consuming the Lord's flesh and blood. Blood does not taste or smell like wine.

For Christians, not being along side in spirit and truth is (or should be) unthinkable. I see nothing wrong with Christians having a different celebration in memory of Jesus and the Last Supper. My best friend's father was a minister, and that is what they believed and celebrated--the memory. She and I both loved the Lord. She and I understood the beliefs of the other and held each with great respect. We go where the Holy Spirit leads us, and we both have faith that the Holy Spirit knows what he is doing in guiding each individual.

And that was all what my wife wanted to do, share communion with her Catholic friend in respect for her and the church they were in.

 

[ding]

I sure do know what Paul said about it. He said we were not to be divided when we observe the Lord's supper. We were to wait for each other and share so no one goes hungry and no one gets drunk. Obviously, there were people gorging themselves in what was supposed to be a meal of remembrance.

Is that what you were referring to?

That's a horrible summary of it. He admonished them that they were not eating just bread and drinking wine because they were doing it casually like you would have done.

 

[hadit]

That's a horrible summary of it. He admonished them that they were not eating just bread and drinking wine because they were doing it casually like you would have done.

Ah, there it is again, the sign of the failing argument. You know that you've lost when you resort to attempting childish insults. Do better.

 

[ding]

Ah, there it is again, the sign of the failing argument. You know that you've lost when you resort to attempting childish insults. Do better.

How did I insult you?

 

[hadit]

How did I insult you?

I said you attempted to. You failed because it's extremely hard to insult me in any meaningful way, but you do you.

 

[ding]

I said you attempted to. You failed because it's extremely hard to insult me in any meaningful way, but you do you.

There was no attempt and that's why you can't state it. Like I said, Paul admonished them because they were being casual about it. No different than you arguing the requirements should be abolished. Those requirements exist because it's not supposed to be taken casually. It's a sacred act. It's not symbolic.

 

[hadit]

There was no attempt and that's why you can't state it. Like I said, Paul admonished them because they were being casual about it. No different than you arguing the requirements should be abolished. Those requirements exist because it's not supposed to be taken casually. It's a sacred act. It's not symbolic.

He admonished them because people were getting drunk. You don't get drunk from drinking blood. I asked you before, when did you first realize that the priest was giving you blood?

 

[ding]

He admonished them because people were getting drunk. You don't get drunk from drinking blood. I asked you before, when did you first realize that the priest was giving you blood?

What's your basis for that? Maybe post the passage and let's discuss it. Walk me through your interpretation.

 

[ding]

I'm starting by asking you, our resident expert on things Catholic. I wouldn't ask that other guy, he doesn't seem to know much of anything. He seems to think if someone wants to share communion with a Catholic, he's demanding something. That's really odd.

No, you are actually being an ass. You aren't interested in understanding the Catholic faith. That's not what you are here for.

 

[Meriweather]

Okay

No. Not worth reading a second time let alone worthy of any response.

 

[hadit]

What's your basis for that? Maybe post the passage and let's discuss it. Walk me through your interpretation.

"27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.[h] 31 But if we judged[i] ourselves truly, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined[j] so that we may not be condemned along with the world."

Paul is saying that communion is not something to be taken lightly, and when people do, they can bring sickness and death on themselves. Is that what we are seeing now because people don't think they're drinking blood and eating raw meat? This should be easy to check. Are Catholics blessed physically because of their belief or is there no difference between the health and longevity of Protestants vs Catholics? The phrase, "discerning the body" is key. It would appear that Catholics believe that means the participant actually thinks they are eating human flesh and drinking human blood, whereas everyone else sees it as either discerning the relationship between the artifacts of communion and the sacrifice Jesus made of His body or discerning the Body of Christ in the solemn occasion and how we treat communion as different from an ordinary meal.

One of your Catholic cohorts told me that the communion bread and wine were actually tested once or twice and found to have been miraculously turned into human muscle tissue and blood. This was before it was consumed, so the inevitable question becomes, are you tasting and smelling actual blood and raw meat when you take communion? If you are not, you're doing something wrong, because you say vehemently that you are. If you are actually eating human flesh and drinking human blood, and as I was told, it miraculously transforms into those from bread and wine before it is consumed, you should smell and taste blood and raw meat. The church should smell like a slaughterhouse, to be indelicate.

Paul said that at one of the churches people were getting drunk during communion. How do you get drunk from drinking human blood? There's no alcohol in it.

This isn't even an attack on you, it's an open question. You could be honest and just say you don't know, but you believe it and don't understand how it all works. Remember, I've been told ad nauseum that Catholics literally eat flesh and drink blood during communion. If that's so and communion artifacts were found to have transformed into flesh and blood before consumption, I ask when you first realized that you weren't drinking wine. When did you first taste blood and do you taste it today?

 

[hadit]

No. Not worth reading a second time let alone worthy of any response.

Why do you not want to deal with the practical results of your belief? You said yourself that the bread transforms into meat and the wine transforms into blood BEFORE it is consumed, did you not in the evidence you gave me? Put that together with your insistence that Catholics absolutely consume flesh and blood, and the natural question HAS TO BE, do you taste and smell blood? If not, why not?

 

[hadit]

No, you are actually being an ass. You aren't interested in understanding the Catholic faith. That's not what you are here for.

So then tell me, oh mind reader, exactly what I am here for. I've been on a long-term quest to unwrap the true roots and basic tenets of the Christian faith, because I have come to believe that man has layered an awful lot of "stuff" on top of it that may have had good intentions at one time but are hindering true worship and faith today. I asked some hard questions of the denomination I was in as a child and was not satisfied with some of the answers. I'm asking you Catholics to explain and justify your beliefs and have reached a point now where you don't want to discuss the hard questions. Instead, you attempt to weakly insult me and make the discussion about me. Going by what Christ Himself said, there really isn't a whole lot of "stuff" that needs to be added to simple faith in Him, because that faith and the transforming power of the Holy Spirit will guide the Christian to walk with the Body into greater and deeper relationship with Him. So, you can see that I don't look for a fight, I ask hard questions. I will even apologize for where I got snarky and led you to think I was attacking you and your faith.

 

[Meriweather]

Why do you not want to deal with the practical results of your belief? You said yourself that the bread transforms into meat and the wine transforms into blood BEFORE it is consumed, did you not in the evidence you gave me? Put that together with your insistence that Catholics absolutely consume flesh and blood, and the natural question HAS TO BE, do you taste and smell blood? If not, why not?

When I read through your post I was astonished by the ignorance and astounded by the lack of faith in the Lord.

It was like when a student who couldn't add or subtract somehow ended up in my pre-algebra class, where one not only could not be ignorant of adding and subtracting, nor could one be ignorant of multiplication, division, and fractions. I could not teach her pre-algebra due to her ignorance of prerequisites.

The same goes with your post. I might have given it a try anyway, had it not been for the obvious contempt also present. I love the Lord. I have great faith in him and his words. I was close to vomiting (literally) by the time I finished that post. I'm not going to put myself--or the Lord--through that or that lack of respect.

 

[Meriweather]

have reached a point now where you don't want to discuss the hard questions.

The questions are not hard. They are contemptuous, lacking faith in Christ, and the ignorance is overwhelming.

 

[hadit]

When I read through your post I was astonished by the ignorance and astounded by the lack of faith in the Lord.

I have faith, I am asking you to explain yours. When I ask how this transformation occurs, and you say it was tested and found to be meat and blood, why would I NOT ask the questions I did?

It was like when a student who couldn't add or subtract somehow ended up in my pre-algebra class, where one not only could not be ignorant of adding and subtracting, nor could one be ignorant of multiplication, division, and fractions. I could not teach her pre-algebra due to her ignorance of prerequisites.

You teach math? I have tutored math students as well. I love doing that.

The same goes with your post. I might have given it a try anyway, had it not been for the obvious contempt also present. I love the Lord.

I do too, and I am on a life-long quest to uncover the roots of Christian faith because I don't want anything between Him and me. I simply want to know Him fully and He know me, so I don't hear, "I never knew you". I don't believe the answer is found in traditional additions to that simple faith, so the big challenge is discussing this with those who do.

I have great faith in him and his words.

Yes, you have faith. What I don't hear is, "I don't know how it happens, but I believe that it does, somehow. No, I don't taste blood, but I believe I'm drinking it". Why can't you say something like that instead of refusing to deal with it? I can respect a statement of faith without total understanding of it, but you have to acknowledge that, if the bread and wine were both transformed without someone consuming them, whoever did consume them would taste blood and flesh.

I was close to vomiting (literally) by the time I finished that post. I'm not going to put myself--or the Lord--through that or that lack of respect.

Okay, what you see as a lack of respect is me asking hard questions. Look, you can say that you don't understand how you taste bread and wine, but it's actually flesh and blood. I respect someone who says, "I don't know", but you shouldn't shy away from tough questions when you opened the door yourself with your evidence that the miraculous transformation occurred without it being consumed.