Could Transubstantion be true?

Our Lord's God

Well-known member
Of course it could be true.
Do you believe that Moses turned the water of the Nile into blood or was it just symbolic?
Do you believe that Jesus turned water into wine or was it just symbolic?
So there is a precedent for Transubstantiation.
The Chuch teaches that Jesus turned bread into His flesh and wine into his blood because He said so.

Uh, no he didn't.

And the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.

So whatever you define as the church?

Why wouldn't you believe?
 

Our Lord's God

Well-known member
If the Eucharist had the physical characteristics of Jesus' body, blood, soul and divinity:
1. No one would consume It.
2. There would be no faith involved.

John 6: 40 For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

Do you see the Son? I do, everyday at Mass when I receive the Eucharist.
Do you believe that His flesh is true food and His blood true drink? I do, because He said so.

At this time, Jesus also said that his flesh is the bread which had come down out of heaven.

But we don't seem to hear much of an explanation for that...........
 

RayneBeau

Well-known member
Sola scriptura doesn't mean you exclude confessions.
In Col. 2, Paul warns God's people not to allow their faith to be compromised by any philosophy which Paul says is "after the tradition of men... and not after Christ." Paul is making the contrast between man's authority and Christ's authority, the tradition of men on the one hand and the authority of Christ on the other. Your faith stands in the power of God, in the "breathed out" word of God, in a philosophy that is after Christ and not after human tradition. Not after the wisdom of men; not after the tradition of men. in a philosophy that is after Christ and not after human tradition. Not after the wisdom of men; not after the tradition of men. In Matthew 15:6 our Lord Jesus condemned those who, He says, "make void the Word of God" because of their "Tradition." You won't find the Roman Catholic performance of their "transubstantiation" during their Mass, anywhere in God's Word.
 

pilgrim

Well-known member
At this time, Jesus also said that his flesh is the bread which had come down out of heaven.

But we don't seem to hear much of an explanation for that...........
He didn't say it that way.

51 I am the living bread which came down (past tense) from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give (future tense) for the life of the world is my flesh.”
 

Our Lord's God

Well-known member
He didn't say it that way.

Read it again:

52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “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 yourselves. 54 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58 This is the bread which came down from heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.”

So when did this flesh come down out of heaven?

51 I am the living bread which came down (past tense) from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give (future tense) for the life of the world is my flesh.”
 

Nic

Well-known member
Of course it could be true.
Yes, I stated as much. Zwinglian views are largely those who would deny this as a possibility.
Do you believe that Moses turned the water of the Nile into blood or was it just symbolic?
Nice line of questioning, but to clarify it was God using representatives doing the work. 🙂
Do you believe that Jesus turned water into wine or was it just symbolic
💯% 🍷and very good wine 🍷at that.
So there is a precedent for Transubstantiation.
The Chuch teaches that Jesus turned bread into His flesh and wine into his blood because He said so.
Yes there may be lots of precedents yet the declaration beyond scripture as dogma to the faith is although pious and likely for the good of churchmen, church and God, it overreaches to mandate such a lofty view beyond what the holy spirit chose to pen (aisi).
And the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.
Why wouldn't you believe?
I think of church, not dissimilar from how I view prayer. My view of prayer not unlike confessions of faith, is repeating back to God what God plainly tells us.
 

pilgrim

Well-known member
Yes, I stated as much. Zwinglian views are largely those who would deny this as a possibility.

Nice line of questioning, but to clarify it was God using representatives doing the work. 🙂

💯% 🍷and very good wine 🍷at that.

Yes there may be lots of precedents yet the declaration beyond scripture as dogma to the faith is although pious and likely for the good of churchmen, church and God, it overreaches to mandate such a lofty view beyond what the holy spirit chose to pen (aisi).

I think of church, not dissimilar from how I view prayer. My view of prayer not unlike confessions of faith, is repeating back to God what God plainly tells us.
Exactly right! And it is God using the priest as His representative to do this work through him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nic
Top