Hell the eternal death
Death is something not to fear unless you have
fallen away from God, then fear it because that death is forever.
The eternal death is the eternal sadness of one's life.
Your loved ones no longer around you.
All the happy times are gone, all that is left is but a memory,
you wish you can get it all back but, there is no hope there.
Tormented... extinguished... isolated...
yelling out for someone to hear you,
yet no one hears you because they themselves
are to themselves.
You yell for love and love does not come,
all because you turned your back on him who is love.
He gave you chance after chance and
you walked away.
Hell the eternal death is separation of God.
The road to it is wide, and only dead people walk
that road.
No one is predestined to hell; for this, is a willful turning
away from God.
Which one will you chose?
Eternal shadows, everlasting silence, and loneliness
or
Everlasting Love, Joy, and happiness.
By, Matthew E. Trevino
01-26-10
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Our Blessed Mother ever virgin
Venerate: To look upon with feelings of deep respect
Immaculate: Perfectly clean without a flaw or error pure: innocent: sinless
Blessed: Holy; sacred; clean; fortunate; blissful; beatified
Holy: Dedicated to religious use; sacred, spiritually pure; sinless, deserving deep respect
Righteous: Acting in a just, upright manner, virtuous, morally right or justifiable
All these words describe our Blessed Mother. We worship God, our Lord, Jesus; and, we venerate our Blessed Mother. The words Immaculate Conception are not in the Bible, and neither is the word Trinity, but yet, we all believe in the Holy Trinity. Let me ask you all a question, could God have made Mary without sin? See again how not everything is in the Bible itself. As I've stated before in the first letter, as Catholics we go with Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition which as the Bible says is important. There are no false traditions that work with the Holy Spirit. “I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.” (1 Cor. 11:2) But the word of the LORD remains forever… This is the word that has been proclaimed to you” (1 Peter 1:25). The Holy Spirit is at work with every teaching of the Catholic Church through the unity with the will of the Father through our LORD Jesus Christ. Now with saying this, I can say that Mary being immaculate is not going against Sacred Scripture. Let’s start with (Luke 1: 6, 15, 28, 37, 48)
6: Both were righteous in the eyes of God, observing all the commandments and ordinances of the LORD blamelessly. (Zechariah & Elizabeth)
15: for he will be great in the sight of [the] LORD. He will drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother's womb, (John)
28: And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The LORD is with you. (Mary)
37: For nothing will be impossible for God.”
48: For he has looked upon his handmaid's lowliness; behold, from now on will all ages call me blessed.
And in (Gen 3:15) they are talking about Mary mother of God.
I will make you and the woman hate each other; her offspring and yours will always be enemies. Her offspring will crush your head, and you will bite her offspring's heel.”
Adam and Eve were also sinless before Eve ate out of the forbidden tree. If they can be sinless why can't Mary be immaculate? I ask because it would be befitting her to be so as she is the God Barer. Immaculate, Blessed, Holy and, Righteous are all perfect words to describe our Mother in heaven. She is a spiritual Mother for all Christians. She is there guiding us straight to our LORD Jesus Christ. Her Immaculate Heart is the garden in which ones faith can grow with the her guardianship of a mother loving her child.
Perpetual Virginity,
Okay, the first thing I'd like to say here is that In Aramaric (which is the language our LORD Jesus spoke.) there is no translation for, uncle, aunt, cousin, nice or nephew. All they had was brother and sister. [Oh, and I would just like to put this in which has nothing to do with any of this. But I found it cool. In the native American language they too called their aunt, uncle, cousin, nice, and nephew by brother and sister. I just thought this was a cool thing to now.] Okay back to the issue, second thing at the death of our LORD Jesus looking down at his mother he said to her “Woman behold, your son. Then he looked at the disciple how he loved and sad, behold, your mother.”(John 19: 26-27). At this time, if Jesus had any brothers or sisters he would have handed over guardianship of his mother to them, but he did not, he entrusted her to John. If you were in the alleged brother’s stead before the cross, and you heard Jesus entrusting your mother to the care of non-family member, how would you feel? Insulted?
Here let’s look at what the founding fathers of Protestantism said concerning our Blessed Mother:
Luther: “It is an article of faith that Mary is mother of the LORD and still a virgin... Christ we believe,, came forth from a womb left perfectly intact.” (work of Luther, vol. II, 319-320;vol.6,510)
Calvin: “There have been certain folk who have wished to suggest from this passage [Matt. 1:25] that the Virgin Mary had other children that the Son of God, and that Joseph had then dwelt with her later; but what folly this is! For the gospel writer did not wish to record what happened after wards; he simply wished to make clear Joseph's obedience and to show also that Joseph had been well and truly assured that it was God who had sent His angel to Mary. He had therefore never dwelt with her nor had he shared her company... and besides this our LORD Jesus Christ is called the first-born. This is not because there was a second or third, but because the gospel writer is paying regard to the precedence. Scripture speaks thus of naming the first-born whether or no there was any question of the second.”(Sermon on Matthew 1:22-25,published 1562)
Zwingli: I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.”(Zwingli Opera, Vol. I,424.)
These are the fathers of Protestantism speaking on our Blessed Mother's everlasting Virginity. I think of our Blessed Mother as one of God's most prefect creatures on earth and in heaven. A masterpiece of God's work--clean from sin not a taint of sin so that Satan will not be able to possess her.
As we can read in Gen. 3:15, “I will make you and the woman hate each other; her offspring and your will always be enemies. Her offspring will crush your head, and you will bite her offspring's heel.” Our blessed Mother was preserved from original sin at her conception. Our Lady was immaculately conceived, hence the Title “Immaculate Conception.” Protestants always confuse the issue of conception. We use the words “conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit” to try and give understanding to the Incarnation, but Christ was not conceived in the literally manner as in man and woman having relations. Christ was begotten, Mary was conceived. Now specifically speaking, we are talking about the point when the soul is infused into the body. At that moment, God Our Father preserved her from the stain of Original Sin in order that she might bear Our Lord and Savior, Jesus. Mary clean of heart and soul bared a son that would and still rules over men. She is the ark of the new Covenant. These here are parallel verses that are very interesting. It looks like Mary almost took the same path as the Ark of the Covenant did in the Old Testament. You can find this in a book called Catholics for a risen by Tim Gray. Will be looking at (2 Samuel 6 and Luke 1).
(2 Sam 6:2)
and led them to Baalah in Judah, in order to bring from there God's Covenant Box, bearing the name of the LORD Almighty, whose throne is above the winged creatures.
(Luke 1:39)
Soon afterward Mary got ready and hurried off to a town in the hill county of Judea.
(2 Sam 6:9)
Then David was afraid of the LORD and said, “How can I take the Covenant Box with me now?
(Luke 1:43)
Why should this great thing happen to me, that my LORD's mother comes to visit me?
(2 Sam 6:10)
So he decided not to take it with him to Jerusalem; instead, he turned off the read and took it to the house of Obed Edom, a native of the city of Gath.
(Luke 1:40)
She went into Zechariah's house and greeted Elizabeth.
(2 Sam 6:11)
It stayed there three months, and the LORD blessed Obed Edom and his family.
(Luke 1:56)
Mary stayed about three months with Elizabeth and then went back home.
(2 Sam 6:2)
and led them to Baalah in Judah, in order to bring from there God's Ark of the Covenant, bearing the name of the LORD almighty, whose throne is above the winged creatures.
(Luke 1:47)
My soul is glad because of God my Savior,
(2 Sam 6:15)
And so he and all the Israelites took the Covenant Box up to Jerusalem with shouts of joy and sounds of trumpets.
(Luke 1:42)
and said in a loud voice, “You are the most blessed of all women and blessed is the child you will bear!
(2 Sam 6:16)
As the Ark was being brought into the city, and saw King David dancing and jumping around in the scared dance, and she was disgusted with him.
(Luke 1:41)
When Elizabeth hard Mary's greeting, the baby moved within her. Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit
Well I think that this here was very interesting. Like I've before, it looks like the Mary took the same path as the Ark of the Covenant does. Just something to think about and pray over. Now lets look at the Queen of heaven and earth, where do we get this idea from? Okay I think most of you all know that when reading Revelation it's open to time. So we cant read past , present, and future in these books.
Here for example in book 12 we are looking at the verses 1,5,9,13. These here are past tense.
(Revelation 12:1)
Then a great and mysterious sight appeared in the sky. There was a woman, whose dress was the sun and who had the moon under her feet and a crow of twelve stars on her head.
(Revelation 12:5)
Then she gave birth to a son, who will rule over all nation with an iron rod. But the child was snatched away and taken to Gog and his throne
(Revelation 12:9)
The huge dragon was thrown out-that ancient serpent, named the devil, or satan, that deceived the whole world. He was thrown down to earth, and all his angels with him.
(Revelation 12:13)
When the dragon realized that he had been thrown down to the earth, he began to pursue the woman who had given birth to the boy.
Now lets look at a little part in Genesis 3:15. Here we are looking at the future : “I will make you and the woman hate each other; her offspring and yours will always be enemies. Her offspring will crush your head, and you will bite her offspring's heel.”
Who is the person who they might be talking about here in Genesis 3:15? It's about Mary and Jesus her only son. And so by the power of the Holy Spirit in Unity with God the Father, And so by Grace of her divine Motherhood, Our Lady, is Queen of Heaven and Earth. Our hearts belong to God the Father himself and because of His Grace we as one in His one body we all share this bound to help, pray, and love one and other. Thomas Howard put it beautifully this way:
What King surrounds himself with warped, dwarfish, worthless creatures? The more glorious the king, the more glorious are the titles and honors he bestows. The plumes, cockades, coronets, diadems, mantles, and rosettes that deck his retinue testify to one thing alone: his own majesty and munificence. He is a very great king, to have figures of such immense in his train, or even better, to have raised them to such dignity. These great lords and ladies, mantled and crowned with the highest possible honor and rank, are precisely his vassals. This glittering array is his court! All glory to him and, in him, glory and honor to these others. Thomas Howard, Evangelical is Not Enough (Nashville, Tenn.: Thomas Nelson, 1984), 87.
We worship the King our LORD God, and because of his grace we venerate our Blessed Mother who is of great importance to all of mankind. She gave birth to Jesus not just in her womb, but in her heart too. Mary was the first disciple of God, Mary accepted God in mind, heart, and soul, and because of this honor God gave Mary, we as Catholic honor her as well.
Immaculate: Perfectly clean without a flaw or error pure: innocent: sinless
Blessed: Holy; sacred; clean; fortunate; blissful; beatified
Holy: Dedicated to religious use; sacred, spiritually pure; sinless, deserving deep respect
Righteous: Acting in a just, upright manner, virtuous, morally right or justifiable
All these words describe our Blessed Mother. We worship God, our Lord, Jesus; and, we venerate our Blessed Mother. The words Immaculate Conception are not in the Bible, and neither is the word Trinity, but yet, we all believe in the Holy Trinity. Let me ask you all a question, could God have made Mary without sin? See again how not everything is in the Bible itself. As I've stated before in the first letter, as Catholics we go with Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition which as the Bible says is important. There are no false traditions that work with the Holy Spirit. “I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.” (1 Cor. 11:2) But the word of the LORD remains forever… This is the word that has been proclaimed to you” (1 Peter 1:25). The Holy Spirit is at work with every teaching of the Catholic Church through the unity with the will of the Father through our LORD Jesus Christ. Now with saying this, I can say that Mary being immaculate is not going against Sacred Scripture. Let’s start with (Luke 1: 6, 15, 28, 37, 48)
6: Both were righteous in the eyes of God, observing all the commandments and ordinances of the LORD blamelessly. (Zechariah & Elizabeth)
15: for he will be great in the sight of [the] LORD. He will drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother's womb, (John)
28: And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The LORD is with you. (Mary)
37: For nothing will be impossible for God.”
48: For he has looked upon his handmaid's lowliness; behold, from now on will all ages call me blessed.
And in (Gen 3:15) they are talking about Mary mother of God.
I will make you and the woman hate each other; her offspring and yours will always be enemies. Her offspring will crush your head, and you will bite her offspring's heel.”
Adam and Eve were also sinless before Eve ate out of the forbidden tree. If they can be sinless why can't Mary be immaculate? I ask because it would be befitting her to be so as she is the God Barer. Immaculate, Blessed, Holy and, Righteous are all perfect words to describe our Mother in heaven. She is a spiritual Mother for all Christians. She is there guiding us straight to our LORD Jesus Christ. Her Immaculate Heart is the garden in which ones faith can grow with the her guardianship of a mother loving her child.
Perpetual Virginity,
Okay, the first thing I'd like to say here is that In Aramaric (which is the language our LORD Jesus spoke.) there is no translation for, uncle, aunt, cousin, nice or nephew. All they had was brother and sister. [Oh, and I would just like to put this in which has nothing to do with any of this. But I found it cool. In the native American language they too called their aunt, uncle, cousin, nice, and nephew by brother and sister. I just thought this was a cool thing to now.] Okay back to the issue, second thing at the death of our LORD Jesus looking down at his mother he said to her “Woman behold, your son. Then he looked at the disciple how he loved and sad, behold, your mother.”(John 19: 26-27). At this time, if Jesus had any brothers or sisters he would have handed over guardianship of his mother to them, but he did not, he entrusted her to John. If you were in the alleged brother’s stead before the cross, and you heard Jesus entrusting your mother to the care of non-family member, how would you feel? Insulted?
Here let’s look at what the founding fathers of Protestantism said concerning our Blessed Mother:
Luther: “It is an article of faith that Mary is mother of the LORD and still a virgin... Christ we believe,, came forth from a womb left perfectly intact.” (work of Luther, vol. II, 319-320;vol.6,510)
Calvin: “There have been certain folk who have wished to suggest from this passage [Matt. 1:25] that the Virgin Mary had other children that the Son of God, and that Joseph had then dwelt with her later; but what folly this is! For the gospel writer did not wish to record what happened after wards; he simply wished to make clear Joseph's obedience and to show also that Joseph had been well and truly assured that it was God who had sent His angel to Mary. He had therefore never dwelt with her nor had he shared her company... and besides this our LORD Jesus Christ is called the first-born. This is not because there was a second or third, but because the gospel writer is paying regard to the precedence. Scripture speaks thus of naming the first-born whether or no there was any question of the second.”(Sermon on Matthew 1:22-25,published 1562)
Zwingli: I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.”(Zwingli Opera, Vol. I,424.)
These are the fathers of Protestantism speaking on our Blessed Mother's everlasting Virginity. I think of our Blessed Mother as one of God's most prefect creatures on earth and in heaven. A masterpiece of God's work--clean from sin not a taint of sin so that Satan will not be able to possess her.
As we can read in Gen. 3:15, “I will make you and the woman hate each other; her offspring and your will always be enemies. Her offspring will crush your head, and you will bite her offspring's heel.” Our blessed Mother was preserved from original sin at her conception. Our Lady was immaculately conceived, hence the Title “Immaculate Conception.” Protestants always confuse the issue of conception. We use the words “conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit” to try and give understanding to the Incarnation, but Christ was not conceived in the literally manner as in man and woman having relations. Christ was begotten, Mary was conceived. Now specifically speaking, we are talking about the point when the soul is infused into the body. At that moment, God Our Father preserved her from the stain of Original Sin in order that she might bear Our Lord and Savior, Jesus. Mary clean of heart and soul bared a son that would and still rules over men. She is the ark of the new Covenant. These here are parallel verses that are very interesting. It looks like Mary almost took the same path as the Ark of the Covenant did in the Old Testament. You can find this in a book called Catholics for a risen by Tim Gray. Will be looking at (2 Samuel 6 and Luke 1).
(2 Sam 6:2)
and led them to Baalah in Judah, in order to bring from there God's Covenant Box, bearing the name of the LORD Almighty, whose throne is above the winged creatures.
(Luke 1:39)
Soon afterward Mary got ready and hurried off to a town in the hill county of Judea.
(2 Sam 6:9)
Then David was afraid of the LORD and said, “How can I take the Covenant Box with me now?
(Luke 1:43)
Why should this great thing happen to me, that my LORD's mother comes to visit me?
(2 Sam 6:10)
So he decided not to take it with him to Jerusalem; instead, he turned off the read and took it to the house of Obed Edom, a native of the city of Gath.
(Luke 1:40)
She went into Zechariah's house and greeted Elizabeth.
(2 Sam 6:11)
It stayed there three months, and the LORD blessed Obed Edom and his family.
(Luke 1:56)
Mary stayed about three months with Elizabeth and then went back home.
(2 Sam 6:2)
and led them to Baalah in Judah, in order to bring from there God's Ark of the Covenant, bearing the name of the LORD almighty, whose throne is above the winged creatures.
(Luke 1:47)
My soul is glad because of God my Savior,
(2 Sam 6:15)
And so he and all the Israelites took the Covenant Box up to Jerusalem with shouts of joy and sounds of trumpets.
(Luke 1:42)
and said in a loud voice, “You are the most blessed of all women and blessed is the child you will bear!
(2 Sam 6:16)
As the Ark was being brought into the city, and saw King David dancing and jumping around in the scared dance, and she was disgusted with him.
(Luke 1:41)
When Elizabeth hard Mary's greeting, the baby moved within her. Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit
Well I think that this here was very interesting. Like I've before, it looks like the Mary took the same path as the Ark of the Covenant does. Just something to think about and pray over. Now lets look at the Queen of heaven and earth, where do we get this idea from? Okay I think most of you all know that when reading Revelation it's open to time. So we cant read past , present, and future in these books.
Here for example in book 12 we are looking at the verses 1,5,9,13. These here are past tense.
(Revelation 12:1)
Then a great and mysterious sight appeared in the sky. There was a woman, whose dress was the sun and who had the moon under her feet and a crow of twelve stars on her head.
(Revelation 12:5)
Then she gave birth to a son, who will rule over all nation with an iron rod. But the child was snatched away and taken to Gog and his throne
(Revelation 12:9)
The huge dragon was thrown out-that ancient serpent, named the devil, or satan, that deceived the whole world. He was thrown down to earth, and all his angels with him.
(Revelation 12:13)
When the dragon realized that he had been thrown down to the earth, he began to pursue the woman who had given birth to the boy.
Now lets look at a little part in Genesis 3:15. Here we are looking at the future : “I will make you and the woman hate each other; her offspring and yours will always be enemies. Her offspring will crush your head, and you will bite her offspring's heel.”
Who is the person who they might be talking about here in Genesis 3:15? It's about Mary and Jesus her only son. And so by the power of the Holy Spirit in Unity with God the Father, And so by Grace of her divine Motherhood, Our Lady, is Queen of Heaven and Earth. Our hearts belong to God the Father himself and because of His Grace we as one in His one body we all share this bound to help, pray, and love one and other. Thomas Howard put it beautifully this way:
What King surrounds himself with warped, dwarfish, worthless creatures? The more glorious the king, the more glorious are the titles and honors he bestows. The plumes, cockades, coronets, diadems, mantles, and rosettes that deck his retinue testify to one thing alone: his own majesty and munificence. He is a very great king, to have figures of such immense in his train, or even better, to have raised them to such dignity. These great lords and ladies, mantled and crowned with the highest possible honor and rank, are precisely his vassals. This glittering array is his court! All glory to him and, in him, glory and honor to these others. Thomas Howard, Evangelical is Not Enough (Nashville, Tenn.: Thomas Nelson, 1984), 87.
We worship the King our LORD God, and because of his grace we venerate our Blessed Mother who is of great importance to all of mankind. She gave birth to Jesus not just in her womb, but in her heart too. Mary was the first disciple of God, Mary accepted God in mind, heart, and soul, and because of this honor God gave Mary, we as Catholic honor her as well.
The Eucharist (Carpus Christs)
The Eucharist (Corpus Christi)
What happens to those that don't believe that the Eucharist becomes the Body and Blood of Christ? I was asked this question given to me by one of you, and well before I answer you I'd like to being by showing you what I have learned thus far. With God's help, I hope that we partake in the Joy I feel in sharing this with you.
Lets start with (John 6:53-56) which is exactly one year before the last supper, right before the passover, Jesus said:
John 6:53
“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his 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”
This passage is not merely a metaphor that asks us to put our faith in Him. If it were only so, Jesus would not be a very good teacher. Everyone listening to Him understood this literally:
John 6:52
“how can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
When Jesus speaks of himself as being the “door” or the “vine” no one asked Him “How can this man be a door made out of wood?” or “How can this man claim to be a plant?” Furthermore, in these verses of the “door” and the “vine,” it is very clear from their context that He was using metaphors. However, we can see that in John 6 Jesus is speaking literal terms. Lets look at
John 6:41 and 6:52
“The Jews then murmured at him because he said, 'I am the bread which came down from heaven.”[...and then...] “the Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?'”
Why is it that they Jews understood it literally and you can't? You, like them can't handle this Truth. If Jesus were speaking metaphorically, He would have taken the time to elaborate this point to make it clear, but instead, He goes on to make His literal point several more times in even stronger terms. After verse 53, Jesus stops using the normal Greek word phago (which just means “eat”, and can sometimes have a symbolic meaning). and he started using trogo, (which is a very vivid word meaning “munch” or “gnaw” and which is never anything but literal in the Greek bible and literature).
Yes in verse 63 Jesus says “the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” Now, when and where in the bible do they ever use spirit as a symbol? Spirit is the life soul of everything that God created. This to me is why God is present in the Eucharist. Even more so with Jesus saying this verse. (John 4:24) says; God is spirit-. You sure don't think he is speaking symbolically here do you? When you do a study on the word Jesus uses for “flesh” here, you'll find that there's nowhere in the Gospels where it is used symbolically either.
This is the only place in the bible where followers of Jesus abandon him for theological reasons. Verse 60 they say, “this is a hard teaching, who can listen to it.” Then in (John 6:66) it goes to say; “After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him.” Weird and interesting that the only verse in the bible with the numbers 666 is where people reject Jesus because of his teaching about the Eucharist. Think and pray about it. Anyhow, here we have people leaving Jesus because of this hard teaching. Some people think this was the biggest crowd that Jesus ever preached to, which would make this his single biggest public relations blunder. He could have cleared things up and stopped everyone from leaving just by saying “no,no, listen you guys, it was just a symbol, I don't really mean my literal body and blood.” Okay then verses 67-68: Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave.?” Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go to? You have the words of eternal life.
Here lets look ahead and look at (Mark 4:34) “Without parables he did not speak to them, but to his disciples he explained everything in private.” Okay if he had some mysterious symbolic meaning in John 6, he didn't explain it to his disciples, which is another reason to think he was being literal. And there are other places in the Gospels where Jesus just repeats a true but unpopular teaching like in (Matthew 9:2-8) where he talks about his power to forgive sins, and people don't believe him, and he insists on it. John 8:58 goes on to say “Before Abraham was born, I am!” Once again I say to you is Jesus speaking symbolically here? This passage about the Eucharist is just like these I've just showed you. Plus, there’re heaps of places where Jesus says something, the disciples get it wrong, and Jesus explains it to them.
Eating flash and drinking blood does actually have a metaphorical meaning in the Old Testament, (Psalm 27:2) When evildoers come at me to devour my flesh, These my enemies and foes themselves stumble and fall. So if Jesus was speaking symbolically, he would have been saying that people must slander him in order to have eternal life. I don't think so.
Now we also have the teaching of St. Paul in (1Corinthians 10:16-17)
The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf. See communion is a participation in the body of Christ. He presence is really there.
Then we also have (1 Corinthians 11:27-29)
“Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the LORD unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the LORD. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eat and drinks judgment on himself.”
It sounds like St. Paul's talking about the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. You wouldn't be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the LORD if it was just a symbol. And, did you know that the Greek phrase for being “guilty of someone's body and blood” is a technical way of saying “guilty of murder?” It's very serious. So, if one is taking grape juice and crackers it would not be a big deal. But, if one fools around with it knowing Jesus is really present, then to receive communion unworthily would be a big deal, which is why we take St. Paul very seriously, and why we take the Eucharist vary seriously as well. In the last supper, Jesus didn't say “this represents my body,” did he? He said “This is my body.” and we just take him at his word.
A little history.
The teaching of the Eucharist is nothing new. Transubstantiation is a technical term that describes what happens, and the only reason it wasn't widely used until the 11th century was because that was the first time on record that anyone significant denied the real presence. So the Catholic Church used Transubstantiation (which just means “change of substance”) to define things very clearly in a single word.
The Eastern Church had been using the Greek word metaousiosis, which means the same thing for hundreds of years before that. You do believe in the Trinity? I'm pretty sure you do. Well the word Trinity wasn't officially used until the council of Nicaea in AD325, but that doesn't mean that no-one believed in the Trinity until then. And as for the Real Presence in the early Church, heed this, this is a quote from St. Ignatius of Antioch who was martyred in AD110 and was a disciple of of both Peter and John: “They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist to be the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, Flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His goodness, raised up again. ”(Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6,2; William A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical press, 1970), Vol. 1,#64). He also wrote this “I desire the Bread of God, which is the Flesh of Jesus Christ... and for drink I desire His Blood, which is love incorruptible.” (Letter to the Romans 7,3; Jurgens,#54a.) J.N.D. Kelly, a well respected historian, who's not a Catholic, and summaries what the Early Church believed about the Eucharist: “Eucharistic teaching, it should be understood at out set, was in general unquestioningly realist, i. e., the consecrated bread and wine were taken to be, and were treated and designated as, the Savior's body and blood.” (J.N.D. Kelly, early Christian Doctrines, pg.440).
In (Mathew 16:5-12) Jesus speaks of the bread.
In coming to the other side of the sea, the disciples had forgotten to bring bread. Jesus said to them, “Look out, and beware of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” The concluded among themselves, saying, “it is because we have brought no bread,” When Jesus became aware of this he said, “You of little faith, why do you conclude among your selves that it is because you have no bread? Do you not yet understand, and do you not remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many wicker baskets you took up? Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many baskets you took up? How do you not comprehend that I was not speaking to you about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” Then they understood that he was telling them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Saddusees.
In (John 4:31-34)
Meanwhile, the disciples urged him, “Rabbi, eat.” But he said to them, “I have food to eat of which you do not know.” So the disciples said to one another, “could someone have brought him something to eat?” Jesus said to them, “My food is to do the will of the one who send me and to finish his work.
I leave you with this brothers and sisters in Christ, Bethlehem means: House of Bread and Manger means: a place for food... Think and pray for the knowledge and ability to believe the Word of God, and to accept what he has done; that you might understand the unity of His Kingdom here on earth and the fullness of His body which is the Church, the visible and invisible.
The answer to the question is, one will not enter heaven without believing in the fullness of God's teachings. Remember we must BELIEVE in all that was set before us, not to understand it but to BELIEVE in it. How can someone come to an understanding if one does not believe in it first?
What happens to those that don't believe that the Eucharist becomes the Body and Blood of Christ? I was asked this question given to me by one of you, and well before I answer you I'd like to being by showing you what I have learned thus far. With God's help, I hope that we partake in the Joy I feel in sharing this with you.
Lets start with (John 6:53-56) which is exactly one year before the last supper, right before the passover, Jesus said:
John 6:53
“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his 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”
This passage is not merely a metaphor that asks us to put our faith in Him. If it were only so, Jesus would not be a very good teacher. Everyone listening to Him understood this literally:
John 6:52
“how can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
When Jesus speaks of himself as being the “door” or the “vine” no one asked Him “How can this man be a door made out of wood?” or “How can this man claim to be a plant?” Furthermore, in these verses of the “door” and the “vine,” it is very clear from their context that He was using metaphors. However, we can see that in John 6 Jesus is speaking literal terms. Lets look at
John 6:41 and 6:52
“The Jews then murmured at him because he said, 'I am the bread which came down from heaven.”[...and then...] “the Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?'”
Why is it that they Jews understood it literally and you can't? You, like them can't handle this Truth. If Jesus were speaking metaphorically, He would have taken the time to elaborate this point to make it clear, but instead, He goes on to make His literal point several more times in even stronger terms. After verse 53, Jesus stops using the normal Greek word phago (which just means “eat”, and can sometimes have a symbolic meaning). and he started using trogo, (which is a very vivid word meaning “munch” or “gnaw” and which is never anything but literal in the Greek bible and literature).
Yes in verse 63 Jesus says “the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” Now, when and where in the bible do they ever use spirit as a symbol? Spirit is the life soul of everything that God created. This to me is why God is present in the Eucharist. Even more so with Jesus saying this verse. (John 4:24) says; God is spirit-. You sure don't think he is speaking symbolically here do you? When you do a study on the word Jesus uses for “flesh” here, you'll find that there's nowhere in the Gospels where it is used symbolically either.
This is the only place in the bible where followers of Jesus abandon him for theological reasons. Verse 60 they say, “this is a hard teaching, who can listen to it.” Then in (John 6:66) it goes to say; “After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him.” Weird and interesting that the only verse in the bible with the numbers 666 is where people reject Jesus because of his teaching about the Eucharist. Think and pray about it. Anyhow, here we have people leaving Jesus because of this hard teaching. Some people think this was the biggest crowd that Jesus ever preached to, which would make this his single biggest public relations blunder. He could have cleared things up and stopped everyone from leaving just by saying “no,no, listen you guys, it was just a symbol, I don't really mean my literal body and blood.” Okay then verses 67-68: Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave.?” Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go to? You have the words of eternal life.
Here lets look ahead and look at (Mark 4:34) “Without parables he did not speak to them, but to his disciples he explained everything in private.” Okay if he had some mysterious symbolic meaning in John 6, he didn't explain it to his disciples, which is another reason to think he was being literal. And there are other places in the Gospels where Jesus just repeats a true but unpopular teaching like in (Matthew 9:2-8) where he talks about his power to forgive sins, and people don't believe him, and he insists on it. John 8:58 goes on to say “Before Abraham was born, I am!” Once again I say to you is Jesus speaking symbolically here? This passage about the Eucharist is just like these I've just showed you. Plus, there’re heaps of places where Jesus says something, the disciples get it wrong, and Jesus explains it to them.
Eating flash and drinking blood does actually have a metaphorical meaning in the Old Testament, (Psalm 27:2) When evildoers come at me to devour my flesh, These my enemies and foes themselves stumble and fall. So if Jesus was speaking symbolically, he would have been saying that people must slander him in order to have eternal life. I don't think so.
Now we also have the teaching of St. Paul in (1Corinthians 10:16-17)
The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf. See communion is a participation in the body of Christ. He presence is really there.
Then we also have (1 Corinthians 11:27-29)
“Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the LORD unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the LORD. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eat and drinks judgment on himself.”
It sounds like St. Paul's talking about the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. You wouldn't be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the LORD if it was just a symbol. And, did you know that the Greek phrase for being “guilty of someone's body and blood” is a technical way of saying “guilty of murder?” It's very serious. So, if one is taking grape juice and crackers it would not be a big deal. But, if one fools around with it knowing Jesus is really present, then to receive communion unworthily would be a big deal, which is why we take St. Paul very seriously, and why we take the Eucharist vary seriously as well. In the last supper, Jesus didn't say “this represents my body,” did he? He said “This is my body.” and we just take him at his word.
A little history.
The teaching of the Eucharist is nothing new. Transubstantiation is a technical term that describes what happens, and the only reason it wasn't widely used until the 11th century was because that was the first time on record that anyone significant denied the real presence. So the Catholic Church used Transubstantiation (which just means “change of substance”) to define things very clearly in a single word.
The Eastern Church had been using the Greek word metaousiosis, which means the same thing for hundreds of years before that. You do believe in the Trinity? I'm pretty sure you do. Well the word Trinity wasn't officially used until the council of Nicaea in AD325, but that doesn't mean that no-one believed in the Trinity until then. And as for the Real Presence in the early Church, heed this, this is a quote from St. Ignatius of Antioch who was martyred in AD110 and was a disciple of of both Peter and John: “They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist to be the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, Flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His goodness, raised up again. ”(Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6,2; William A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical press, 1970), Vol. 1,#64). He also wrote this “I desire the Bread of God, which is the Flesh of Jesus Christ... and for drink I desire His Blood, which is love incorruptible.” (Letter to the Romans 7,3; Jurgens,#54a.) J.N.D. Kelly, a well respected historian, who's not a Catholic, and summaries what the Early Church believed about the Eucharist: “Eucharistic teaching, it should be understood at out set, was in general unquestioningly realist, i. e., the consecrated bread and wine were taken to be, and were treated and designated as, the Savior's body and blood.” (J.N.D. Kelly, early Christian Doctrines, pg.440).
In (Mathew 16:5-12) Jesus speaks of the bread.
In coming to the other side of the sea, the disciples had forgotten to bring bread. Jesus said to them, “Look out, and beware of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” The concluded among themselves, saying, “it is because we have brought no bread,” When Jesus became aware of this he said, “You of little faith, why do you conclude among your selves that it is because you have no bread? Do you not yet understand, and do you not remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many wicker baskets you took up? Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many baskets you took up? How do you not comprehend that I was not speaking to you about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” Then they understood that he was telling them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Saddusees.
In (John 4:31-34)
Meanwhile, the disciples urged him, “Rabbi, eat.” But he said to them, “I have food to eat of which you do not know.” So the disciples said to one another, “could someone have brought him something to eat?” Jesus said to them, “My food is to do the will of the one who send me and to finish his work.
I leave you with this brothers and sisters in Christ, Bethlehem means: House of Bread and Manger means: a place for food... Think and pray for the knowledge and ability to believe the Word of God, and to accept what he has done; that you might understand the unity of His Kingdom here on earth and the fullness of His body which is the Church, the visible and invisible.
The answer to the question is, one will not enter heaven without believing in the fullness of God's teachings. Remember we must BELIEVE in all that was set before us, not to understand it but to BELIEVE in it. How can someone come to an understanding if one does not believe in it first?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
