Only One Truth

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
162

[quote]ConorM wrote:
"I wanted to emphasize to heterodox readers that the bread & wine during the Divine Liturgy of Orthodox Church services is transubstantiated into the actual Blood and Body of the Lord Jesus Christ - this is no mere symbol. "

Yeah I actually laughed at a bishop when I was 9 years old when he said this very thing. I followed it up with, and we’re expected to believe we are actually eating Jesus? In what way could this ever make sense? Does it change into the actual molecules of Jesus’ blood? Hmm not possible, so in what way is it the real body and blood of jesus? And why is Jesus’ body so inherently suitable for vegetarians?[/quote]

SH and I need to be careful here. Transubstatiation is a somewhat misleading Aristotelian term.

Food-of any kind-is only a fallen symbol or type of Jesus’ body and blood which is the only REAL food. In the Eucharist, the bread and wine molecules are accepted by God to become his body and blood. Its more an issue of removing the fallen nature of food from bread and wine. What remains is the only real food.

(But lets avoid a debate of terms like substance and esssence here please).

163

[quote]ConorM wrote:
I can’t just try to believe in God, I still won’t.
[/quote]

Fair enough.

You evidently have very little, if any, real knowledge of the attributes of God and how they pertain to one another and us.

More proof that you have little knowledge in this area. That’s not meant to be an insult, just an observation. I’m sure you are very sharp in other areas, Scripture and knowledge about God simply isn’t one of your strong suits.

[quote]
Especially when religion is totally non based on fact, the Bible is a totally hypocritical, non factual book on which we place all our beliefs and every single thing about the universe makes me think there is no God. Oh sorry big guy I didn’t believe in you, well what did you expect?? You put the theory of evolution in there to test my faith? Oh I see, all those evil popes, yeah you personally picked them guys out and still thought you were the perfect being I see…Im blathering but you see where I am going with this.[/quote]

You sound quite bitter.

Matthew

164

[quote]ConorM wrote:
"I wanted to emphasize to heterodox readers that the bread & wine during the Divine Liturgy of Orthodox Church services is transubstantiated into the actual Blood and Body of the Lord Jesus Christ - this is no mere symbol. "

Yeah I actually laughed at a bishop when I was 9 years old when he said this very thing. …
[/quote]

Are you proud of yourself for that?

165

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

Papism is the heresy that the Pope is the single ultimate theological authority in the church.
[/quote]

"pa?pist
n.

Offensive. Used as a disparaging term for a Roman Catholic."

Christian tolerance at its finest.

166

[quote]ConorM wrote:
"I wanted to emphasize to heterodox readers that the bread & wine during the Divine Liturgy of Orthodox Church services is transubstantiated into the actual Blood and Body of the Lord Jesus Christ - this is no mere symbol. "

Yeah I actually laughed at a bishop when I was 9 years old when he said this very thing. I followed it up with, and we’re expected to believe we are actually eating Jesus? In what way could this ever make sense? Does it change into the actual molecules of Jesus’ blood? Hmm not possible, so in what way is it the real body and blood of jesus? And why is Jesus’ body so inherently suitable for vegetarians?[/quote]

What you’re describing is transubstantiation, and I think that it’s one of the kinkier things in Catholic faith. Giving ordained priests magic powers might have worked back in 1400, but things are little different nowadays. One could argue that the general populace today is little more tuned-in to reality than we were a couple of centuries ago.

The Eastern Orthodox folks reject the term transubstantiation (like the way they reject most anything Roman Catholic… I guess hatchets like a couple of crusades are hard to bury), and call it “Real Presence”, but it’s basically the same thing. The bread and wine become the literal blood and whole body of Christ, but retain their outward appearance of bread and wine so as not to disgust us.

Cool, huh? :slight_smile:

167

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
ConorM wrote:
"I wanted to emphasize to heterodox readers that the bread & wine during the Divine Liturgy of Orthodox Church services is transubstantiated into the actual Blood and Body of the Lord Jesus Christ - this is no mere symbol. "

Yeah I actually laughed at a bishop when I was 9 years old when he said this very thing. I followed it up with, and we’re expected to believe we are actually eating Jesus? In what way could this ever make sense? Does it change into the actual molecules of Jesus’ blood? Hmm not possible, so in what way is it the real body and blood of jesus? And why is Jesus’ body so inherently suitable for vegetarians?

What you’re describing is transubstantiation, and I think that it’s one of the kinkier things in Catholic faith. Giving ordained priests magic powers might have worked back in 1400, but things are little different nowadays. One could argue that the general populace today is little more tuned-in to reality than we were a couple of centuries ago.

The Eastern Orthodox folks reject the term transubstantiation (like the way they reject most anything Roman Catholic… I guess hatchets like a couple of crusades are hard to bury), and call it “Real Presence”, but it’s basically the same thing. The bread and wine become the literal blood and whole body of Christ, but retain their outward appearance of bread and wine so as not to disgust us.

Cool, huh? :slight_smile:
[/quote]

OK, question: What were Jesus apostles eating when he first instituted the celebration of the last supper? And did Jesus eat his own flesh and drink his own blood? For he said to his apostles at that time: ?I tell you this, I shall not drink of this fruit of the vine again, until I drink it with you, new wine, in the kingdom of my Father.??Matt. 26:28, 29 Also notice he only called it the fruit of the vine.
And if it would literally become Jesus flesh and blood why would God condemn the Jews(remember these were God’s people before they rejected Jesus)in their Law if they drank blood? Leviticus 7:27 “Any soul who eats any blood that soul must be cut off(killed)from his people.” At the time Jesus made his statements he was talking to an all-Jew audience. Why would he make such offensive statements when he was such a masterful teacher at other times? It was because he was testing why many were following him. Those who were just interested in a free meal or wanted to see a miracle were repelled and left. His faithful followers knew he was the Messiah and were willing to wait for an explanation. Otherwise it seems quite strange how easily they accepted that they would now become cannabals.

The Greeks had a divine bread and also a divine nectar or ambrosia, which their mythological gods sipped and which was supposed to impart immortality. The Hindus had a similar belief.

That something could be transubstantiated, changed from one substance to another without changing its appearance, is based on the Aristotelian error that all matter has a basic and invisible substance of which it really consists as well as its outward, visible characteristics, such as color, form, texture, odor, taste, etc., known as ?accidents.? In philosophizing on the Lord?s supper the early Alexandrian theologians ?obviously borrowed from the terminology of the Greek mysteries.?

168

[quote]doogie wrote:
mertdawg wrote:

Papism is the heresy that the Pope is the single ultimate theological authority in the church.

"pa?pist
n.

Offensive. Used as a disparaging term for a Roman Catholic."

Christian tolerance at its finest.[/quote]

Christians should not tolerate falsehood.

169

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
The Eastern Orthodox folks reject the term transubstantiation (like the way they reject most anything Roman Catholic… I guess hatchets like a couple of crusades are hard to bury), and call it “Real Presence”, but it’s basically the same thing. The bread and wine become the literal blood and whole body of Christ, but retain their outward appearance of bread and wine so as not to disgust us.

Cool, huh? :slight_smile:
[/quote]

This is not true. I explained it earlier. You are trying to describe the fallen cosmos with fallen analogies, but Jesus’ body is the archtype of the terms you are using.

170

[quote]Fishlips wrote:
OK, question: What were Jesus apostles eating when he first instituted the celebration of the last supper? And did Jesus eat his own flesh and drink his own blood? For he said to his apostles at that time: ?I tell you this, I shall not drink of this fruit of the vine again, until I drink it with you, new wine, in the kingdom of my Father.??Matt. 26:28, 29 [/quote]

a) He also said he WAS the vine, and
b) The wine at communion which is Jesus’ blood is more real wine than what you are thinking of as wine which has a fallen nature .

171

Here’s another mystery. When you eat bread, the molecules of the bread become your flesh and blood.

172

[quote]Fishlips wrote:
why would God condemn the Jews(remember these were God’s people before they rejected Jesus)in their Law if they drank blood? Leviticus 7:27 “Any soul who eats any blood that soul must be cut off(killed)from his people.” At the time Jesus made his statements he was talking to an all-Jew audience. [/quote]

An analogy here: why would god condemn homosexuality when sex is good?

Why don’t you eat rocks if eating is good?

It is not cannibalism because the church is Jesus’ body.

173

[quote]Fishlips wrote:
The Greeks had a divine bread and also a divine nectar or ambrosia, which their mythological gods sipped and which was supposed to impart immortality. The Hindus had a similar belief.
[/quote]

And God gave them this ritual so that they would understand when they had become ready for Christianity.

174

[quote]Fishlips wrote:
That something could be transubstantiated, changed from one substance to another without changing its appearance, is based on the Aristotelian error that all matter has a basic and invisible substance of which it really consists as well as its outward, visible characteristics, such as color, form, texture, odor, taste, etc., known as ?accidents.? In philosophizing on the Lord?s supper the early Alexandrian theologians ?obviously borrowed from the terminology of the Greek mysteries.?[/quote]

Fallen gray matter trying to understand resurrected glorified matter. You should stop now.

175

Okay then mert, fair enough. Do Eastern Othrodox priests have magic powers granted to them by God or not? I’m confused.

176

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Okay then mert, fair enough. Do Eastern Othrodox priests have magic powers granted to them by God or not? I’m confused.[/quote]

No, the priest has no magic powers. There is no such thing as magic. We do not believe in the supernatural either.

177

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
lothario1132 wrote:
Okay then mert, fair enough. Do Eastern Othrodox priests have magic powers granted to them by God or not? I’m confused.

No, the priest has no magic powers. There is no such thing as magic. We do not believe in the supernatural either.[/quote]

So what’s the difference between the Eucharist and any other meal? Nothing then?

178

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
mertdawg wrote:
lothario1132 wrote:
Okay then mert, fair enough. Do Eastern Othrodox priests have magic powers granted to them by God or not? I’m confused.

No, the priest has no magic powers. There is no such thing as magic. We do not believe in the supernatural either.

So what’s the difference between the Eucharist and any other meal? Nothing then?[/quote]

Its made out of bread and wine? That’s one way its different from most meals. It is consumed in church. This would be different than breakfast (another meal) for example.

Do you want to know how it changes during the service?

179

lothario1132

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
…
Don’t talk down to me and my faith in Amaterasu you elitist pig. Just because there are more people that worship Jesus than the sun doesn’t mean that you have the market cornered on religious faith. …[/quote]

Don’t fear, you are not alone. As Amaterasu no Omikami is the central deity of the Shintou faith - and every Japanese is by birth part of it, you have at least 125m brethren (plus a few nutjobs on the outside). Also, you have a living representative - the Japanese Tennou. Although the Japanese constitution has reduced his role (and religious scripture clearly overules any of this secular crap), there is documented (!) lineage back to the days of Amaterasu und Susano-O. :wink:

Oh yeah, for the donkey argument guys: It is perhaps not good style mocking this thread, but I find it a nice (and actually quite harmless) kind of ironic criticism: For weeks now the political threads have been swarmed with scripture references, proclaimin ABSOLUTE TRUTHS, and how your god judges certain things. While it is your right to proclaim these things, the sheer overwhelmingness and dogmatism is indeed a bit (de)pressing. So if countering this with a bit of alternative scripture (some of it a lot older than the Christian stuff), and bit of harmless humour troubles you, you should perhaps … relax a bit.
I can live with being called a donkey. Can you? :wink:

Makkun

180

[quote]Fishlips wrote:
Now I don’t have all night and the Orthodox contingent have asked a million questions so if every one isn’t addressed yet please don’t attribute it to negligence.[/quote]

Fishlips, I appreciate the time you’ve spent skimming through the various posts, but to be honest, I was hoping you could reply to my posts with lengthier feedback. Perhaps I bombarded you with too much information which you weren’t ready to handle. I tend to do that to, especially when it comes to weightlifting & nutrition. If you have the time, please counter my posts on a one-by-one basis as I have courteously done with yours. You’ve evidently skimmed over all my strongpoints…

[quote]
So I agree not everything could be recorded in the Bible. But what was not recorded would certainly not have contradicted written scripture nor would critical information have been left out.[/quote]

For the first part of this statement, you’re 100% right. The Orthodox Christian Church adheres to the Bible and has never contradicted any of its written scripture. For the second part of the statement, you’re 100% wrong. I can bombard you with thousands of different concepts the Bible touches upon but doesn’t clarify, leaving Protestants totally clueless over such matters.

St. Matthew 17:18
“And Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of him; and the child was cured from that very hour. Then the disciples came to Jesus privately and said, ‘Why could we not cast it out?’ So Jesus said to them, ‘Because of your unbelief; for assuredly, I say to you, if you have faith as a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there’, and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you. [b]However, this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting’.[/b]”

Describe the guidelines of [b]prayer and fasting[/b] which Jesus Christ refers to for casting out demons. Surely, knowing how to heal a demoniac is critical information.
*Remember, according to you the Bible should tell it all so don’t go running to google for Orthodox websites to find the answer. I’ll be waiting for your reply…

181

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Its made out of bread and wine? That’s one way its different from most meals. It is consumed in church. This would be different than breakfast (another meal) for example.

Do you want to know how it changes during the service?
[/quote]

You’ve lost me again, mert. I’m sorry I don’t get this, but I’m not trying to mock y’all. I think you guys can tell when I’m mocking you, as I don’t try to hide it.

Anyway, what I’m asking is if y’all think that the Eucharist is anything other than a ritual or a symbolic reference to the Last Supper. What I understand of y’all’s beliefs is that there is something more to it than that. Am I wrong?