The Bible and Apologetics

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/1john57.htm

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/jesusgd2.htm

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjvdcha8.htm

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/1john57-exegesis.htm

http://answer-islam.org/Answering-Osamarebuttal.html

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/spirit1_r1.htm

http://answering-islam.org/God/echad.html

http://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_02.asp

http://www.bible.ca/H-trinity.htm

http://carm.org/early-trinitarian-quotes


____________


From http://web.archive.org/web/20090529151526/http://christkeep.com/articles/eucharist_exposed.html


Catholic Eucharist is Unbiblical
(www.catholic.com refuted)

“Then shall it be for a man to burn: for he will take thereof, and warm himself; yea, he kindleth it, and baketh bread; yea, he maketh a god, and worshippeth it; he maketh it a graven image, and falleth down thereto.” – Isaiah 44:15

Notice how Isaiah mimics the terminology of the Eucharist? Roman Catholics bake bread [eucharist] make it into a god, WORSHIP it, and even bow to it.

“Yet how he can contract a solid body within so little room, I think it is directly contrary to itself, for to be made so little, and yet not diminished: To be so straightly drawn together, and yet feel no pain; I think it is so contrary to the quality of a natural body, and so like to the little transubstantiate god in the Papists’ Mass, that I can never believe it.” – King James, Daemonologie

“John 6:30 begins a colloquy that took place in the synagogue at Capernaum. The Jews asked Jesus what sign he could perform so that they might believe in him. As a challenge, they noted that "our ancestors ate manna in the desert." Could Jesus top that? He told them the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. "Give us this bread always," they said. Jesus replied, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst." [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



Bible Modification Warning: The disciples said: “evermore give us this bread,” NOT “Give us this bread ALWAYS,” (they wanted to have the bread at that instant, and, wanted to have a constant supply) Christ didn’t give them any physical bread when they asked; Christ didn’t HAVE any bread at the time when he said these things in Capernaum.



Paul threw the bread into the sea after giving thanks

“And when he (Paul) had thus spoken, he took bread, and gave thanks to God in presence of them all: and when he had broken it, he began to eat. Then were they all of good cheer, and they also took some meat. And we were in all in the ship two hundred threescore and sixteen souls. And when they had eaten enough, they lightened the ship, and cast out the wheat into the sea.” – Acts 27:35-38

They casted out the bread into the sea! Can you imagine how “blasphemous” that would be to Catholics if they did that to Eucharist wafers? (Of course they are just pieces of bread, nothing special).

They weren’t eating the bread for “salvation,” they were eating it for actual food! We are finite and are dependent on these “barriers.”

If the Catholic Church is based on “Apostolic succession” – then Paul would have had the ability to magically turn bread into Christ; it was just plain normal bread! The apostles couldn’t change a piece of bread into a rock if their life depended on it – let alone turning bread into an almighty, omnipotent and divine creator of the universe.

Note: they didn’t just eat bread, but also meat! This goes against the Catholic mass (you wouldn’t tell a priest after receiving the Eucharist: “can I have some meat with that?”).



“And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” – Acts 2:42

“And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,” – Acts 2:46

They broke bread loaves as a symbol (and for physical food, not for religious reasons). It was a sign of fellowship, a sign that Christ has died on the cross for our free salvation. And when they ate their bread – they were GLAD and rejoicing, you were lucky to get meals of bread in Jesus’ day, food was hard to come by.

Note: here we see them ALSO eating meat with their bread yet again. The Greek word for “meat” is “trophe,” and it appears in both Acts 27:36 and Acts 2:46. It’s also worthy to state that neither the Apostles nor the disciples stated that the “bread” was Christ, they just called it normal old bread – even throwing it into seas.



Meat that “perisheth”

Jesus wasn’t trying to “top” anything, he states that the people did seek him for the physical loaves, but Christ came to give them eternal life (which is obviously spiritual): “Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled. Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.” – John 6:26-27

Christ was talking about the foreshadow of his death; the Father had sealed Christ’s appointed death, and thus he would give them eternal life by their faith (believers were also saved by faith in the Old Testament as well, but Christ was the one who removed the “curse of the law” where no physical sacrifices are required – which is proof enough that salvation is only spiritual: Old Testament sins were “queued” for Christ’s upcoming death).

We read that CHRIST HIMSELF will give us meat that endures for life eternal – thus signifying it is a gift we are to receive from faith. How can the Eucharist be physical if Christ talked about meat that didn’t perish? Eucharist wafers will perish; everything does on this earth except God’s word. Christ even told his disciples to “labour not” for meat that perishes! Can it be more obvious? Only the meat which Christ gives us (salvation) will endure for eternity.



God’s Word does not perish

The only thing that does not perish is God’s Word:

“The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.” – Isaiah 40:8

“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” – Matthew 24:35



God IS his Word:

“And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.” – Revelation 19:13



Since God is his Word, and his Word does not perish – how could Christ be referring to a physical wafer that DOES perish? He couldn’t have been, for he was referring to himself – God does not perish and lives forever.



Christ never gave them any bread!

“Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.” – John 6:34-35

When the disciples asked Christ “give us this bread;” he never handed them any Eucharist wafers, he said I AM the bread (referring to Exodus 3:14, God’s statement: “I AM who I AM”), and whoever BELIEVES on him shall “never thirst or hunger” (same as in John 4:13-14/4:31-34, but water and meat was used). Furthermore, Christ just told them they would “never hunger;” so no physical [finite] wafers could accomplish this.

To conclude this; Jesus was teaching in Capernaum – he never had any physical bread at the time! In fact, when the disciples were quickly squabbling wanting the bread, Christ passed it off and said HE WAS THE BREAD: referring to his spiritual being and not a piece of physical bread.

“These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.” – John 6:59

Christ was merely telling the congregation about believing on him. And the second purpose of this was to foreshadow Christ’s death – see God always has multiple purposes for one event.



Christ says his words (the sermon) were spirit

After Christ’s “breadless” sermon in Capernaum, Christ clarifies to his disciples (who thought he was being literal):

“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 (the sermon), they are spirit, and they are life.” – John 6:60-63



Christ told his disciples (after they were murmuring like the Pharisees – both groups thought he was literal) that the flesh “profits nothing,” and the words spoken to them in Capernaum (about eating the flesh/bread) ARE SPIRIT!

This is irrefutable evidence against the “Eucharist” required for salvation – it’s not the Eucharist you need – it’s placing faith in Christ: it’s all spiritual, nothing physical required. If physical works were required, Christ wouldn’t have said “it is the SPIRIT that quickeneth” – and who gives the increase? God!

Anyone who tries to twist Christ’s words (the very words HE spoke) is hopeless – Christ said the flesh profits nothing and that his John 6 words were spirit.
But Catholic.com attempts to do just that...

“In John 6:60 we read: "Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’" These were his disciples, people used to his remarkable ways. He warned them not to think carnally, but spiritually: "It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life" (John 6:63; cf. 1 Cor. 2:12–14).” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



Why would Christ be telling his disciples to think “spiritually” when they were murmuring over what he said? That wouldn’t have answered their question over Christ’s sermon! In fact, that random “interpretation” that the catholics give is such a sore thumb it doesn’t even fit in context with John 6. They were murmuring about him saying he was a physical piece of bread – and you’ll see why this is important. Furthermore, the Greek word “pneuma” is used for “spirit,” meaning Christ was referring to his spiritual BEING (and that his flesh form profits nothing, only spirit is of value – the flesh dies and is useless, a finite dependant casing that houses our soul). Pneuma on its own cannot be used to describe a “thought” because it refers to a spirit.



Catholics bend backwards to twist John 6:60-63 - somehow trying to link it to Christ warning his disciples not to think carnally but spiritually. Christ said the “words” (referring to his sermon on Capernaum) were spiritual and not actually referring to his flesh.



You can even tell the disciples were murmuring over the SERMON:

“These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this (the sermon), said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?” – John 6:59-60



Why the disciples forsook Christ

“But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.” – John 6:64-68

The disciples whom were with Christ walked away because they DIDN’T BELIEVE HE WAS THE CHRIST! Peter told Jesus that he has the WORDS (not bread) of eternal life. For the words (sermon) spoken at Capernaum was in spiritual terms, not literal. Soon as Christ dilates to them in John 6:63 that he wasn’t literal, they left! Notice they didn’t leave before when they thought Christ was literal.



Catholic.com has fabricated a response to this:

“This is the only record we have of any of Christ’s followers forsaking him for purely doctrinal reasons. If it had all been a misunderstanding, if they erred in taking a metaphor in a literal sense, why didn’t he call them back and straighten things out? Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



Doctrinal reasons? They didn’t forsake him because he said he was a piece of bread - that was the reason they stayed: they thought he meant he was a piece of bread - they forsook Christ AFTER he explained (in John 6:60-63) what he meant with the bread analogy: because they did not BELIEVE he was the Christ; the Son of God.

Christ was implying that he was the Son of God the whole time, only AFTER when they understood did they turn away.

This makes sense since the Jews and Pharisees constantly persecuted Jesus saying he wasn’t the “Son of God.”



Christ assigned the twelve apostles to make the Jews believe that Jesus was the Son of God giving them eternal life:

“These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” – Matthew 10:5-6

Note: Paul was the only apostle sent to the “gentiles.” He was apostle #13; James was the replacement to Judas Iscariot.



Why didn’t Christ call back his disciples to “straighten things out?” He WAS doing that (hence assigning the twelve apostles in Matthew 10:5-6 to bring the lost Jews to Christ). The Bible plays a humorous joke – since now the GENTILES are the ones trying to straighten out the Jews (before in the Old Testament it was reversed); clearly catholic.com didn’t take this into account if they think Christ isn’t doing anything to correct people (2 Peter 3:9).



“But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.” – John 6:64

Jesus knew from the BEGINNING who would follow him, and who wouldn’t. Jesus was constantly debating and arguing with the Pharisees (who laughed at him while on the cross); do you think he could change their minds? Of course not.



“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!” – Matthew 23:37

Christ DID try to gather the lost Jews, he wanted them to come so badly, but they WOULD NOT! God gives us free choice; does Catholic.com expect the Jews and former disciples to come back to Christ like magic?



Early Church knew about John 6:63

“Whatever else might be said, the early Church took John 6 literally. In fact, there is no record from the early centuries that implies Christians doubted the constant Catholic interpretation. There exists no document in which the literal interpretation is opposed and only the metaphorical accepted.” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



The early Church did NOT take John chapter 6 literally. There may have been the oddball that misinterpreted scripture being carnal (such as Cyprian or Clement – just as such people exist today); however, all of the early church letters give an allegorical sense, not literal. Catholic.com is being very biased and obviously never took the care to backup or give different views. So let’s see a quick overview from the church “beginners” (I prefer not to use the term “fathers” because of Matthew 23:9):

Ignatius writes: “I have no delight in the food of corruption or in the delights of this life. I desire the bread of God, WHICH IS the flesh of Christ who was of the seed of David; and for a draught I desire His blood, WHICH IS love incorruptible.” – Ignatius of Antioch to the Romans, Chapter 7, 7:3

You’ll notice Ignatius says he doesn’t delight for FOOD of corruption (i.e. actual physical food). Rather the bread OF GOD, which is Christ dying on the cross for our sins that we may believe – the bread OF GOD (i.e. the bread of life) is not physical bread – it is an allusion for Christ. And Ignatius finishes off by saying Christ’s blood – WHICH IS LOVE! Not actual physical wine.

Polycarp writes that we are NOT saved by “works” (i.e. eating bread or dunking oneself in water), rather, simply by faith:

“though ye saw Him not, ye believe with joy unutterable and full of glory; unto which joy many desire to enter in; forasmuch as ye know that it is by grace ye are saved, not of works, but by the will of God through Jesus Christ.” – Polycarp 1:3

Polycarp was alluding to these verses (he mostly quotes Paul throughout his letter):

“But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” – Romans 4:5

“And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.” – John 6:40

The Eucharist (or the last supper) is merely “commemorating” and remembering Christ’s death, Augustine affirms this: “Before the coming of Christ, the flesh and blood of this sacrifice were foreshadowed in the animals slain; in the passion of Christ the types were fulfilled by the true sacrifice; after the ascension of Christ, this sacrifice is commemorated in the sacrament” - Augustine, Contra Faustus, XX

As for there being no “document” opposing a literal view – of course not! Roman Catholicism didn’t exist yet, so, the subject wasn’t a controversy. Everyone knew that the “bread of heaven” was an allusion to Christ




I have to wonder, why are Catholics so obsessed over external material? Christ took John 6 in spiritual terms – that just means MEN are liars (Romans 3:4) and that we should only trust what Christ says – Bible is sole authority for God wrote it. It is interesting to see the early writings of early believers – but not EVERYTHING they say is free from error; Polycarp (in my opinion) was the most developed in doctrine – for he accepted a gospel without works and ONLY faith for salvation.



Note: no “early Christians” were involved with Rome since it was persecuting them (killing all of God’s people). Even the moniker “ROMAN Catholic” gives it away. Flee Rome! Ignatius writes about being led to Rome: “Pray for the church which is in Syria, whence I am led a prisoner to Rome -- I who am the very last of the faithful there; according as I was counted worthy to be found unto the honour of God. Fare ye well in God the Father and in Jesus Christ our common hope.” – Ignatius of Antioch to the Ephesians, Chapter 21, 21:2

Why then is the Vatican in ROME? Revelation 17/18?



Spiritual not physical

“Why do Fundamentalists and Evangelicals reject the plain, literal interpretation of John 6? For them, Catholic sacraments are out because they imply a spiritual reality—grace—being conveyed by means of matter. This seems to them to be a violation of the divine plan. For many Protestants, matter is not to be used, but overcome or avoided.” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



Frankly I don’t reject the LITERAL and PLAIN message of John 6 – Jesus clarifies himself with LITERAL terms saying the flesh profits nothing and that his words were of spiritual meaning.

“Conveying” salvation (or spirituality – which is rather contradictory, can’t convey spirit physically) with physical means defies everything the Bible stands for.

“For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.” – Romans 8:2

“So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” – Romans 8:8-9

You CANNOT please God with physical things (material objects/idols) of the flesh.

“But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.” – John 4:23

We worship God in SPIRIT – not with material objects.

“God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;” - Acts 17:24-25

I’d say the Eucharist is a “temple” made by the hands of men (it is, after all, supposed to “house” Jesus); Christ does not dwell in our idols/temples made with hands – Catholics make us think so.

“And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” – Matthew 16:17

Again, nothing revealed to Peter was of “flesh and blood” – it is all spiritual.



Christ said to brake bread in remembrance of him – not for salvation. Catholic.com would make us think non-Catholics ever do these events (I do occasionally do – however NOT for salvation but to remember I am saved by faith – it’s a reminder). I often eat unleavened bread for Passover (Matzos as it is now called, but it is increasingly harder to find) – something Catholics wouldn’t know about, in fact, they claim “Easter” is Passover – that (again) is a pagan practice from Babylon, the painting of eggs comes straight from Babylon – SURPRISE with a Dagon hat on top!

These events are for symbolism, Christ wants it fresh in our minds; sadly, the symbolism of “saved by faith” is no longer there, in fact, CHRIST isn’t even there!

They literally replaced him with a cookie... They replaced him with Peter... They replaced him with Mary... They replaced him with “saints”... They replaced him priests... Literally everything the Catholic system is reliant upon IGNORES Christ, no longer is God the mediator, no longer is God the Rock of the Church, no longer do you even PRAY to him, but rather deceased beings.

This is HORRIBLE! Woe be to those that cut off Christ’s head to replace it with something else. Would be to God that all Catholics directed [spiritual] worship DIRECTLY to Christ. They don’t mean to blaspheme God (if they really knew what they were doing), but we are also accountable for striving towards the truth and reading the TRUE meaning and doctrines behind the Bible.

Ask God – 1 John 1:9 is there when you need it.



The Pharisees/Jews did err

At this point the Jews understood him to be speaking metaphorically. Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: "‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52). His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–56).” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



The whole time the congregation Christ preached to thought he was speaking literally. This is an artificial environment for an argument.

“The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” – John 6:52

The Jews stated this because they thought he was referring to physical flesh – this is correct, but Jesus repeated himself (like he did to Nicodemus in John 3) to refer to his spiritual self (of course they STILL didn’t get it, which is why Christ clarified in John 6:60-63, and then the whole congregation abandoned Christ when they understood his figurative meaning – referring himself to the Son of God: except the 12 apostles who remained faithful and believed).

When Jesus told Nicodemus “you must be born again” he thought you had to be PHSYICALLY born again from the womb – not born with the Holy Spirit.



Jesus said many things to the Jews that they took literally (when Christ meant spiritually): “Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.” – John 2:20-22

Would the Catholics tell me that Christ was actually referring to the temple because the Jews took him literally? I hope not!

The last thing you want to do is trust the judgment of the Pharisees, and this is what the Catholics are doing, they tell their readers that the Pharisees were right! Well, the Pharisees mimic the very face of Catholicism today – the Pharisees had traditions (going back for years)/rituals/works salvation/long robes and clothing/fancy palaces etc – it is without doubt in my mind that Catholics trust what the Pharisees say and endorse it to top it off.



Problem of the finite wafer

“One suspects, had they been asked by the Creator their opinion of how to bring about mankind’s salvation, Fundamentalists would have advised him to adopt a different approach. How much cleaner things would be if spirit never dirtied itself with matter! But God approves of matter—he approves of it because he created it—and he approves of it so much that he comes to us under the appearances of bread and wine, just as he does in the physical form of the Incarnate Christ.” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



God stated quite clearly in Acts 17:24-25 that anything we “build” with our hands cannot house Christ. An omnipotent infinite God turning himself into a finite wafer (but the wafer still remains a wafer of course): how degenerating and illogical.

We eat food because we are finite; finity depends on barriers for maintenance – how could eating a cracker (finite) grant us salvation which is infinite and everlasting?

It can’t – Catholics place finite “barriers” (which limit us to mortality and are the OPPOSITE of salvation frankly) and expect these barriers to grant “salvation for an infinity.” However, this can only be given by GOD: for he is infinite, created everything, and has no barriers of his own.

The very notion of using “barriers” for salvation just doesn’t make sense. If we have to obtain salvation “via barrier” – then that would make salvation itself A barrier; because it wouldn’t be free (by faith), and it turns God into a monster – creating an unreliable median for salvation.

What if someone on their death bed wants to be saved? Do they have to call a priest with a bunch of crackers, a giant water bowl, and give them “last rites” to be saved?

This is unreliable and unrealistic – God is not a dictator!

HOWEVER, if people want to be judged upon their works – God will do so, and they shall burn in hell for not accepting a very simple free gift (Matthew 7:21-23), but ignorant and going to establish their OWN righteousness out of finite means thinking it accounts for infinity.

“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.” – John 6:58

Why was Christ different from the bread that “came down from heaven?” Because he was the LAMB OF GOD who died on the cross. Jesus was not talking about crackers; otherwise it would be the same as the food “that came down from heaven:” physical FINITE food that perishes.



“He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.” – John 6:56

Christ (as he clarified) was talking about him dwelling in us as spirit:

“But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” – Romans 8:11



How do we get Christ’s spirit?

“For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.” – Romans 4:3

By FAITH! Not by eating crackers that perish, that are finite, and that defy John 6:60-63.



Note: Christ was in the form of a human for a brief time (reduced by barriers such as needing food for sustenance, although when in the wilderness he was able to live without food – so Christ still had powers that we do not have); but he will NOT die again. He only gave his life ONCE.



Problem of the non-instantaneous wafer

“The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” – John 1:29

Christ is the “lamb of God” – he took away the sins of the world (and no, Christ isn’t actually a lamb – just want to clarify that for Catholics).

How could he instantly give his life for the world (after he died on the cross) when Catholics must have a priest to stuff him in a wafer then physically consume him? The Bible clearly teaches that Christ gave his life for the world and anyone who believes (which is accepting the spiritual water of life, the bread of life, and the blood of life that fills YOU ONCE! Yet Catholics fill themselves over and over again) shall have salvation for an infinity. It doesn’t fit, nor does it make sense (and it shouldn’t) – you must take EVERY word/verse of John 6 in context, not reading one verse and basing your judgment on that.

God died instantly for the whole world (not to be “transformed” into a wafer), and whoever believes on him is forever saved.

See: One verse judgment



1 Corinthians 11 - explained

“Some proponents of the Eucharist argue that 1 Corinthians 11 supports transubstantiation. They refer to verse 29 that states - "For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body." A thorough read of 1 Corinthians 11, reveals that the Corinthians were not making the proper distinction between Communion and common meals. Not discerning the Lord's body meant not discerning in the bread and wine the symbols of Christ's body and blood, but partaking of them irreverently, as if it were a common feast.

It is evident that this was the leading offense of the Corinthians. Those who were eating and drinking in an unworthy manner, were getting drunk and selfishly eating before others in the body of Christ. Paul states this as the problem in verses 20 and 21. There is no indication in chapter 11 of 1 Corinthians that Paul believed in or taught transubstantiation.

What is very provocative, in verses 26 and 28 of chapter 11, is that Paul refers to the blessed bread as mere bread after it had been blessed. Paul states in verse 26 - "For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till He comes."

Additionally, if Jesus is really physically present in the Eucharist, why would Paul state that we are to celebrate the Lord's Supper "till He comes"? This would only make sense if the Lord's Supper is in memory of the finished work of Calvary. And that is exactly what Jesus ordained when He said "do this in remembrance of Me." (Luke 22:19). Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Of course, Jesus did not become a literal lamb when He died for the sins of the world, anymore than a wafer turns into the literal body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus during Communion.”

Source: http://www.catholicconcerns.com/Eucharist.html



Samaritan woman and the water of life

“...holy-water (whereby the Devil mocks the Papists)...” – King James, Daemonologie

Christ analogized himself (like he did with the blood and flesh) with water to the Samaritan woman, and the startling thing is Christ said the PHYSICAL WATER would lead people getting thirsty again!

“Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water (the physical well) shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him (Christ imputing his righteousness on you) shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.” - John 4:13-14

Notice the striking similarity to Christ saying whoever drinks of THIS water (Christ) shall never thirst again? Christ said the same thing, whoever eats of this bread shall never hunger, and whoever drinks of this blood shall never thirst.

If the Eucharist (which isn’t a loaf of bread that the original Christians used; stone ovens were used to bake loaves), how come the “water of life” isn’t included with the sacraments? Well it “MUST” be required since Christ deliberately told us to drink the water of life! See the fallacies behind the twisting of figurative phrases? Catholicism bumps into a wall whichever way they go (much like freemasonry with the “oaths”).



Wall bumpers:

*If they [Catholics] say Christ told us to literally drink his “blood” (which doesn’t actually turn into blood, it stays as wine; that alone is enough proof), Christ also tells us to “drink” the water of life – so they bump into a wall by doing one and not the other.

*Christ already clarified in John 6:60-63 that he was referring that sermon in Capernaum as spiritual and was simply figurative.



Christ says the PHYSICAL water, blood, and flesh would lead people being thirsty again because they are not spiritual. Christ IS the water, blood, and bread of life, hence people who accept him by faith never thirst or hunger – spiritually: Christ gives us a constant dose of spirituality and revival, nothing petty physical objects can bring – in fact, the gift of infinite salvation is so HUGE and breathtaking that not all the gold in the world can buy it!

“But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.” – Acts 8:20

“Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:” – 1 Peter 1:18-19

We are NOT redeemed with corruptible (finite) material objects – it is impossible no matter how much you disagree, or no matter how many arguments you try to give; the Bible states it clearly!



Meat that ye know not of

“In the mean while his disciples prayed him, saying, Master, eat. But he said unto them, I have meat to eat that ye know not of. Therefore said the disciples one to another, Hath any man brought him ought to eat? Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.” – John 4:31-34

The meat of Christ (which Christ replied; I have meat that ye not know of) was to do the will of the Father. Again, Christ used the term “meat” figuratively, just as he did with the well water (and it all refers to spiritual events). And what is the WILL of the father?

“And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.” – John 6:40

Again Catholics hit the wall of “saved by faith” – Father sends his uniquely born Son to redeem us BY FAITH.



Some ways Catholics avoid these [obvious] walls is to:

#1 Be under a “papal” authority that claims to have the answers (and anyone not under this “authority” is interpreting the bible THEIR way – even if they simply restate what the Bible says, so Catholics then reject statements coming from “heretics,” even if they ARE correct – ouch!).

#2 Feed people hoaxed translations of Bibles (even then the translations are clear enough), and twist the words (or even go so far as to twist the original Greek/Hebrew)

#3 Have people study under an “official” Catholic agent (Catholic prelate) that brainwashes the student and not allowing freedom of study or questioning (much like schools that teach evolution – it’s not surprising the Jesuits created evolutionary tactics).

#4 NOT READ THE BIBLE AT ALL! “Listen to the priest – and everything will be okay.”



The Disciples at first thought the leaven of the Pharisees WAS physical and not figurative

“On other occasions when there was confusion, Christ explained just what he meant (cf. Matt. 16:5–12). Here, where any misunderstanding would be fatal, there was no effort by Jesus to correct. Instead, he repeated himself for greater emphasis.” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



“And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread. Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread? Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?” – John 16:5-10

It was the DISCIPLES who thought they had to bring physical bread (they REASONED among themselves, saying “IT WAS BECAUSE WE HAVE TAKEN NO BREAD”) but then Christ gives them a rhetorical question (very witty); “why reason ye among yourselves, because YE HAVE BROUGHT NO BREAD?”

Then it is clarified that Christ meant the doctrine of the Pharisees. Indeed it was the disciples who thought Christ meant physical bread:

“How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees? Then understood they (the disciples) how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.” - John 16:11-12

Then at the end of the verse, it clarifies Christ was warning of them of the DOCTRINE of the Pharisees (not the physical leaven from them), because he who doesn’t have God’s doctrine does not have God (because you are not studying correct doctrine and are LAZY – i.e. not in God’s system).

I believe Catholic.com is trying to use this as an excuse to prove Christ “backs up” his claims, well he DID! Right in John 6:60-63! God always does, he doesn’t enforce illogical statements. Furthermore, God actually never “clarified” when he called himself the “Lamb of God” - we just know from “common sense” that God isn’t a lamb, but was sacrificed AS a lamb.

“And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!” – John 1:36

Why didn’t John explain that the “Lamb of God” was figurative? Because we have common sense (God was graceful to giving us it for a reason), so we know that the “Lamb of God” is Christ and doesn’t mean an “actual” lamb.

So even if God didn’t clarify that he was referring to “spiritual” means with John 6:60-63, it should still arrive to us with “common sense.”



God WAS correcting his disciples.

“And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.” – Mark 8:15

The very leaven Christ warned us about has ended up in the Vatican – the ROMAN Catholics teach everything of Herod and the Pharisees, they bake their doctrines with Pharisee leaven. Birds of a feather flock together (and bake their doctrines with the same dough).



Catholics always thirsting and hungering for more

Christ said (in all the verses) that they would not hunger or thirst again. If this notion was indeed of physical bread, water, and wine, why do the Catholics need a constant supply of crackers and wine? (They forgot the water however, unless they plan on drinking the holy water from the bowls near the entrance).

So what did Christ truly mean?

“Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.” – John 6:34-35

If you COME to Christ, you will never hunger, if you BELIEVE on Christ, you will never thirst. No magical wafers involved.



Christ is one body with God

“And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:” – Ephesians 2:16

If transubstantiation is true, Christ’s body would be in many different fragments, which completely contradicts this verse.



The “greater emphasis” lie

“He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis”

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



The Catholic author keeps stressing how Christ “emphasized” eating the (spiritual) blood, flesh and water of life. In John 3 Christ is emphasizing extremely well that you must be BORN AGAIN!

“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” – John 3:3

“Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” – John 3:5

“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” – John 3:36

Why the double-standard Catholic.com?

The word “water” in John 3:5 means “to be physically born,” (it is clarified in the next verse (John 3:6) with “flesh” and “spirit).



Why no studying?

“Notice that Jesus made no attempt to soften what he said, no attempt to correct "misunderstandings," for there were none. Our Lord’s listeners understood him perfectly well. They no longer thought he was speaking metaphorically. If they had, if they mistook what he said, why no correction?” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp



The Catholics are creating an artificial environment here (to mislead the reader as usual);

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” – 2 Timothy 2:15

Catholics WILL be ashamed for their odious, sudden, and bashful statements that never have referencing. Jesus often had to keep repeating things which the “listeners” did not understand;

#1 Christ corrected the disciples when they mistook the leaven of the Pharisees for physical leaven: John 16:5-12

#2 Christ corrected the crowd that came to him for MORE physical bread (the loaves and fish that he split for them), but when he meant salvation by them believing in him: John 6:26-27

#3 Christ corrected his disciples in John 6:60-63 when his disciples mistook him for actually being a piece of bread (which they then forsook him after understanding what “the bread of life” really meant).

#4 Christ kept repeating (and trying to make Nicodemus understand) that “born again” was a spiritual birth and not that of the womb in John 3.

#5 Christ reaffirmed to Peter (in Matthew 16:17) that not blood or flesh revealed anything, but the FATHER (spiritual) which is in heaven.



Why no correction? The Bible itself is based upon [our] errors and God correcting us! That is what the BIBLE itself IS FOR!

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” – 2 Timothy 3:16

How about: “why no STUDYING?” The Catholics have the answers at their fingertips! Literally! The Vaticanus makes short work of Catholic doctrines (that’s probably why they locked it up for a few hundred years, so no one would read it – that’s what I call hiding the truth under a rock).



Imposter Loaf

Jesus when he was with his disciples used a LOAF of Bread – he broke from that single loaf and passed pieces to his disciples. Obviously the bread would have produced lots of crumbs (God told the Jews in the Old Testament to clean all the crumbs from the bread to symbolize their multitude of sins; this would have been during Passover).

The Catholics believe each crumb becomes Jesus so they stopped using the traditional loaves; which is rather anti-biblical taking away the true symbolism behind the Last Supper (obviously this would have had to been imposed way after Christ and the disciples since the traditional Jews and Christians always used loaves – especially the Jews since they hold onto strict traditions – I know because I’ve been to a few synagogues; very nice people – pray that they find Christ).

Note: It is strange how much the Catholic Church boasts for keeping “traditions” when they exclude the loaf and change it into a wafer. THAT is a huge modification from “early Christianity.”



Christ DIED ONCE!

The Catholic Catechism states:

“As sacrifice, the Eucharist is also offered in reparation for the sins of the living and the dead and to obtain spiritual or temporal benefits from God.”

“Every time this mystery is celebrated, "the work of our redemption is carried on."” [emphasis added]

“The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it "re-presents" (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross.”



This is a blatant contradiction to the Bible:

“And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;” – Hebrews 10:11-12

“Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.” – Hebrews 10:18

“For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.” – Romans 6:10

“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:” – 1 Peter 3:18



Cannibalism is sinful

“But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.” – Genesis 9:4

“Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.” – Acts 15:19-20

“As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.” – Acts 21:25



If the wafer actually turned into flesh and blood (which it doesn’t, it is just a dead cracker) God would be going against his own laws. Of course the cracker never turns into flesh and blood – it stays the same because it is merely figurative in itself (which is an irony if Catholics really believe Christ was referring to physical flesh).

Catholics every day *believe* something happens to the wafer (as the priest does his hocus pocus) when it still STAYS THE SAME! The same pasty-dry wafer day-after-day that could be feeding poor children in Africa rather being gobbled by greedy priests with their golden cups, plates and monstrances.

Eating the “blood” is simply sinful and may cause health problems; it doesn’t mean you’ll go to hell (salvation isn’t by works, nor can you lose it), HOWEVER, it means (if the wine really was blood) Catholics would be sinning every time they take a sip! Sinful sipping!



He did brake the bread

“And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;” – Matthew 26:27-26

“And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.” – Luke 22:19

“And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.” – Luke 24:30

“And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body.” – Mark 14:22

Christ broke the bread from the big loaf: Jesus said to break the bread! Why? Because the one loaf symbolized the Church he built (upon himself), and each fragment of the bread symbolized the believers of the Church.

So the way Christ performed the “Last Supper” was by breaking from one universal loaf and handing pieces from that loaf to each believer; not handing wafers... Using a wafer instead of a loaf of bread is like using leavened bread on Passover!



Blood of the New Testament?

“For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” – Matthew 26:28

“And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.” – Mark 14:24

“Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.” – Luke 22:20

“After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance (not salvation) of me.” – 1 Corinthians 11:25



Soon as Christ shed “his blood,” he has become our mediator since we are in the era of the New Testament (some people are still stuck in the Old Testament it seems):

“And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.” – Hebrews 9:15

Christ paid for our sins with his death, what a wonderful saviour... I am saddened that people reject his free gift – he had to suffer innumerable amounts of pain: then has people REJECT his suffering and try to earn their OWN way into heaven? God isn’t happy; his wrath shall wax hot on those who reject him.



More poor arguments from Catholic.com

“But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood." John 6 was an extended promise of what would be instituted at the Last Supper—and it was a promise that could not be more explicit. Or so it would seem to a Catholic. But what do Fundamentalists say?” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp

John 6:60-63 ratifies that everything Christ said about him being a piece of bread were “spiritual” – i.e. referring to HIS spirit, and not that of a piece of rotting moldy finite bread!



“Protestant attacks on the Catholic Church often focus on the Eucharist. This demonstrates that opponents of the Church—mainly Evangelicals and Fundamentalists—recognize one of Catholicism’s core doctrines. What’s more, the attacks show that Fundamentalists are not always literalists. This is seen in their interpretation of the key biblical passage, chapter six of John’s Gospel, in which Christ speaks about the sacrament that will be instituted at the Last Supper. This tract examines the last half of that chapter.” [emphasis added]

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp

Of course the Eucharist is the “core” Catholic doctrine, it reverses a key element on what the Bible says: “Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.” – Hebrews 10:18

No more offering for sins (which is the KEY of the New Testament) – only faith in Christ (he was the ultimate sacrifice – the creator of the universe feeling all of the pain for every single sin); but the Catholic religion has to reverse that for it is headed by none other than Satan. Satan swaps and reverses the Bible (Satan’s sick twisted spin on Matthew 7:1-2).

See: Analysis of Satan & Demons



Satanists try to “hurt” God by torturing Eucharist wafers

“According to The New Encyclopedia of the Occult, the Black Mass is “the central rite of some traditional forms of Satanism.” It is a mockery of the Catholic Mass. During the Black Mass, a Host (consecrated bread) “is defiled in various ways.”

Source: http://www.catholicconcerns.com/Book/Chap-04.html

Satanists during a “black mass” do various torture techniques to “consecrated” Eucharist wafers thinking they are hurting the almighty, omnipotent Jesus Christ.

If the “Eucharist” isn’t a fairytale (which it is), that means Christ is constantly feeling pain by Satanists torturing Eucharists (and apparently by the Apostle Paul who threw the “blessed” bread in the sea). So his suffering on the cross wasn’t enough? He has to suffer MORE?

Rubbish and BLASPHEMY! No one can hurt God – it is impossible, Satan tries to hurt US since he cannot hurt God.



King David tops it off!

“O taste and see that the LORD is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him.” – Psalm 34:8

King David here is using a figurative term to describe God – I can say as a reborn believer that Christ DOES taste good to my soul, I feel comforted, I feel at peace, I know I am safe and secure in the arms of my saviour.



Problems with the Eucharist:

[1] - The Eucharist is a finite physical piece of bread (it sustains our finite and mortal being), salvation is infinite; how can one obtain salvation with a finite BARRIER? Salvation is supposed to remove all barriers, in fact, it HAS no barriers!

[2] - Christ said you would never thirst or hunger again but Catholics are still thirsting and hungering.

[3] - The “water of life” is excluded from the sacraments and mimics what Christ said about the BLOOD and flesh; so they have a double-standard with their doctrines.

[4] - In Capernaum where Jesus preached, he never gave them any physical bread (he said I AM that bread; referring to his spiritual being); and in John 6:60-63 he tells his disciples that his words were SPIRITUAL and not literal. So we see that Christ never doled out any physical loaves because they were not needed for his analogy.

[5] - Christ told his disciples (when they were frightened about not bringing physical bread) that they were to avoid the leaven (doctrines) of the Pharisees, however, Christ didn’t even CARE that they forgot to bring the bread!

[6] - Christ said do this in REMEMBRANCE of me, i.e. an affectionate celebration of what the Lord did for us. To say celebrating the last supper for salvation would be to say Christmas or the Passover would be required for salvation as well.

[7] – John chapter 6 never had anything to do with the “Last Supper.” It was a sermon, not a cooking class (Catholics can whine all they want, but John 6:60-63 and there not even BEING any bread is proof enough).

[8] – Christ said he shall not dwell in temples/idols made by men’s hands; thus he couldn’t dwell in a wafer!

[9] – Paul threw bread into the sea – if it was “Christ’s body” I doubt he’d do such a thing.

[10] – Disciples of Paul broke bread in gladness and rejoiced, also eating meat with their bread – it was nothing but a symbol of rejoicing – knowing Christ died for us (a reminder, and giving God thanks for everything he has done and given us – let alone CREATING us).

[11] – Bible says consuming blood is sinful.

[12] – Christ is in ONE body with the Father – he can’t be split up into different little bodies inside wafers.

[13] – Christ only died ONCE!

[14] – Christ would be constantly feeling pain from Eucharists being tortured, bitten, crushed, etc.



“For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” – Romans