Do not fall for Catholic, Pagan lies

Do not fall for Catholic, Pagan lies.
Christ is the son of God, this idea of a trinity is a false dogma invented by the Roman Emperor Constantine

>“The Council of Nicaea met on May 20, 325 [C.E.]. Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance with the Father.’ . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.”—Encyclopædia Britannica (1970), Volume 6, page 386.

The bible offers ZERO evidence for Christ being God, this idea of three Gods is blapshemous and should be punishable with whippings!

Other urls found in this thread:

discord.gg/3mAQa
blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_324.cfm
y-jesus.com/are-jesus-and-the-father-the-same/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

James 1:13
Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

GOD CANNOT BE TEMPTED BUT JESUS CAN

Matthew 4:1
Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.

Mark 1:13
And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.

Luke 4:2
Being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered.

>Muslim goat fucker detected

John 10:30
I and my Father are one.

Now fuck off Achmed

>The bible offers ZERO evidence for Christ being God
John 10:30
The Unbelief of the Jews
…29My Father who has given them to Me is greater than all. No one can snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30I and the Father are one.” 31At this, the Jews again picked up stones to stone Him.…
>The Father and I are one.

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Okay, according to your logic I am God, since I am one in Christ and to you being one with God means you are God, I am God, you are God, the Mexican shitposter in this thread is God too.
So you're saying the bible lied? God can be tempted?

>Philippians 2

6 His nature is, from the first, divine, and yet he did not see, in the rank of Godhead, a prize to be coveted; 7 he dispossessed himself, and took the nature of a slave, fashioned in the likeness of men, and presenting himself to us in human form

Jesus is my Lord. He was the avatar of the Father. Me and Him are on pretty solid terms, trust me

Okay, here's another person who thinks the bible is filled with lies, that God in fact CAN be tempted. Despite the fact the bible says HE CANT yet JESUS CAN BE.
You can be a polytheist, I will believe the one true God.

>We believe that there are three persons in the Godhead - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, undivided in essence and co-equal in power and glory.

Have you even read what Paul spells out in each of his letters? If he were still alive he'd probably write another telling you how dense you are.

There is one God, you keep saying three in one, that's impossible.

Mark 16:19
So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

Jesus and God are separate according to the bible, that means at the very minimum pagans believe they are two Gods.

Dense because I believe what the early church believed before being influenced by the Pagan cultist Constantine?
Dense because I believe God CANNOT be tempted, like how the bible says he can't, but believe JESUS CAN BE like how the bible says he can?

You are talking about two different things, and both incorrectly. Christ is God, the Trinity is not Polytheistic. Divinity cannot be tempted, but humanity can be. Christ has two natures in a single person. His human nature was often tempted mercilessly (though he never failed).

>you keep saying three in one
Yeah, one in three persons.
>that's impossible
It's a mystery.

“You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.
Isaiah 43:10

I am telling you this now, before it takes place, that when it does take place you may believe that I am he.
John 13:19
According to this, Jesus is Jehovah God

4th century fraud of Constantine

...

...

> I am God, since I am one in Christ and to you being one with God means you are God, I am God, you are God, the Mexican shitposter in this thread is God too.
Amalricianism is underrated.

>These are the only two examples of women holding children in all human history. Women, for countless centuries, refused to hold their children. Experts and historians believe the first recorded holding of a child by its mother happened in Albany, NY in 1912. Though written accounts lead some historians to conclude their might have been sporadic child holdings in the pacific rim during the latter half of the 18th century.,

...

>what the early church believed before being influenced by the Pagan cultist Constantine
The early church was always Trinitarian
"Therefore, if they have determined that the Father and the Son must be regarded as one and the same, for the express purpose of vindicating the unity of God, that unity of His is preserved intact; for He is one, and yet He has a Son, who is equally with Himself comprehended in the same Scriptures. Since they are unwilling to allow that the Son is a distinct Person, second from the Father, lest, being thus second, He should cause two Gods to be spoken of, we have shown above that Two are actually described in Scripture as God and Lord. And to prevent their being offended at this fact, we give a reason why they are not said to be two Gods and two Lords, but that they are two as Father and Son; and this not by severance of their substance, but from the dispensation wherein we declare the Son to be undivided and inseparable from the Father—distinct in degree, not in state. And although, when named apart, He is called God, He does not thereby constitute two Gods, but one; and that from the very circumstance that He is entitled to be called God, from His union with the Father."
-Tertullian, Against Praxeas, Chapter 19

>The Word of God made men
>Men are made of sinful flesh on the outside and a pure spirit on the inside
>When the Word of God became a man, He clothed His godly spirit in sinful flesh
>Jesus flesh is tempted but His spirit knows better than to give in to the temptations
You must be reading too much into this. God cannot be tempted of evil because He won't do it. Which means He will not sin. The devil can most definitely come up to God and tell Him to try sinning, that doesn't mean He'll do it. Jesus was tempted by the devil and rebuked him, because He cannot and will not sin.

Eve held her children

>The bible offers zero evidence for Christ being >God...
The Book of Mormon, 3 NEPHI 11:14 ;
(Jesus speaking)..that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth...


Come home white man

Mormonism is polytheist heresy, and the fundamental teachings of Mormonism contradict even the Book of Mormon.

dont fall for the shills, join kekistan

discord.gg/3mAQa

honest abe

...

Give some contradictions

...

> Everywhere outside the Anglosphere, Easter is called Passover
American education everybody

For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.
Moroni 8:18
This contradicts the doctrine of eternal progression

...

...

"if you symbolically eat his flesh"

not symbolic, bub,

>Jesus was a wine-blooded wafer man

He may have been king of the Jews, but I always knew Jesus was a cracker.

All in good fun, Jesus. I love you, man.

Isaiah 44:6 KJV
Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel, and his redeemer the Lord of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.

Revelation 1:17-18 KJV
And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: [18] I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

Jesus is the first and the last.

Isaiah 9:6 KJV
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Jesus the everlasting father.

Gnosticism is the true red pill.

>Jesus the everlasting father.
That doesn't mean He is the Father. The Father and the Son are different persons, however this nominal distinction is New Testament, so Everlasting Father simply meant God to the Jews.

dionysus is a better god

Yeah, he got crucified same as the rest of the heretics and admitted that God had forsaken him.

New Testament tragedy proving that everyone that's out of order is doomed.

>A things nature is determined by God
>God is all-powerful
>Yet he cannot change the nature of an object.

The Eucharist is the perfect image of Christ's mercy. His weakness on the Cross, His weakness as and Infant, his weakness in His mother's womb, all are exemplified in Him offering himself not merely as God and King, and Savior and, Substitute, but nourishment as well.

>not following the example of good old St. Nick and punching Arians in the face

Real presence is unbiblical. In the bible, the Eucharist is a symbol, a figure.

Dionysis died from an overdose of sucking cock. Hermes Thrice Greatest defeated that loser every time, hence being labeled the "dying god" as opposed to "the almighty living god".

Going down with the ship?

GNOSTICISM IS THE TRUTH.

THE HOLY SPIRIT IS REAL.

>Missing the point this much
Divinity can't be tempted, but God took on the suffering of man when he came as Christ the saviour. Jesus was of two natures, one divine and one human. This was intentional, God chose to suffer as man in order to save mankind.
Why do converts often have such difficulty understanding the Trinity? It's not hard.

Hell Fire.

>That's impossible
Maybe religion isn't for you, user.

> Game of telephone
> Regardless the original message's topic, people closest to source will always have a more accurate grasp of the 'true message.'
> Go on pol
> Expect to find white nationalists into European and ancient occultism
> Find them, but also a lot of christcucks that are otherwise pretty OK

Look. You either trust your ancestors or you don't. You can argue whatever you like about the bible, but you can't argue the timeline. Pagan religions of Europe preceded the cult of Abraham, which includes YOU, by thousands of years. Our ancestors had the trinity concept, as do the hindus (OG Aryans.)

Kek is an archon.

The holy Spirit compels him.

Pythagorean number worship to flip kek into a benevolent archon when

Find me where He says its symbolic, because it seems to me He always is pretty clear. "This is my body"

Have you forgotten that Christ is not merely a man, but the true Word of God? In this He is forever the one that determines what something is.

"VERILY, VERILY, I SAY UNTO YOU, BEFORE ABRAHAM WAS, I AM."

JOHN 8:54-58 ... 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God.’[a] 55 But you have not known him. I know him. If I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and I keep his word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” 57 So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?”[b] 58 Jesus said to them, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”

Other verses which shows that Jesus is God:

Genesis 1:26-27,
Psalm 45:6-7,
Isaiah 7:14,
Matthew 1:23,
John 5:17-18,
John 10:33,
John 20:28,
Acts 20:28,
Colossians 2:9,
1 Timothy 3:16,
Hebrews 1:8-9,
1 John 5:20.

"This is my body" means "This represents my body"
Jesus is God, but He is not one and the same with the Father.
And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
John 17:5

>Other verses which shows that Jesus is God:
Either that or it shows that the New Testament is a tragedy of deceivers.

Jews are Satan-worshiping usurers who stole the name of Jesus' tribe in order to disguise themselves.

Revelation 2:9 (KJV)

"And I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan."

Then why not say it like this? Why was his preaching on this subject so reviled by the crowd, more so then his claim of being the light, or the way?

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?"

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 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 REAL FOOD, and my blood is REAL DRINK."

>Then why not say it like this?
It is clear from the context that it is His intent
>Why was his preaching on this subject so reviled by the crowd
He never preached on the Lord's Supper. I will remind you that John 6 is before any mention of the Last Supper. You have to read John's Gospel backwards for it to be about the Eucharist. Was John not written for the whole world? Imagine this book is new, and you are a pagan living in Rome, and you know little of Christianity. What meaning does John 6 have for you?

>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 you;
Why did Jesus betray the son of man and try to get him murdered? Obviously the son of a virgin wouldn't be labeled the son of man.

Thanks .. you prompted me to look at this more carefully, and I'll do more reading about it. It looks like you are right about this. These links help to explain it a little ...

blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_324.cfm
y-jesus.com/are-jesus-and-the-father-the-same/

>Prior to the widespread adoption of child holding it was common to leave children on the ground or occasionally place them in a specialized vase or bucket. Recent evidence has led etymologists to speculate that this may be the origin of the phrase "kick the bucket" as there would be a substantial risk of death or serious injury if the bucket the child was placed in was kicked or otherwise knocked over either accidentally or intentionally.[7]
Huh, you learn something new every day.

Why exactly were the Jews God's chosen people? Just because they were enslaved by Egyptians? Maybe the Egyptians were just redpilled. The dishonest nature of the Jew and their need to always be the victim makes me find it hard to believe muh enslavement story.

he was talking about the disciples. WE are His body. not the piece of bread.

You're welcome, brother.

Because they are descendants of Abraham. That's literally the only reason. God made a promise to Abraham to make a great nation of his children because he was God's friend. So he had his son Isaac and Isaac had Jacob who had his name changed to Israel by God, and all his sons became the Israelites/Hebrews. Jacob's sons jewed each other too, they sold their brother Joseph into slavery to Egypt because he was favoured by Jacob. So they've been happy merchants since they were born.

>It is clear from the context that it is His intent
how, exactly?

>You have to read John's Gospel backwards for it to be about the Eucharist

This is incredibly spurious. Then what of the foreshadowing of the Crucifixion, or the prophets telling of the Messiah? Are these invalid, because they happen chronologically before the events that have taken place? How many psalms meaning only become clear during Christ's passion?

>He never preached on the Lord's Supper.

What do you think the passage is? Its there for a reason. The evangelists included it for this reason, otherwise why leave it out. Are you implying that only events Christ performed publicly are worthy of
attention?

Thanks for the explanation user, I wasn't aware of some of those details.

>ignoring everything dionysus represented
> not understanding the importance of life,death, and rebirth

Fuck off JW scum.
There are a plethora of cults that came out of the 19th century preaching false doctrine. There has never been a continuous church since the time of Jesus that has denied the trinity. It is only special snowflake cults and Gnostic heretics that seem to crop up to diminish the name above all names.

>Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

>Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

You are making a vane mistake thinking your human mind can comprehend the Godhead.

>Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

Doesn't it seem a little odd that Jacob's sons should turn out bad? I mean if Jacob was the chosen one in a way (being renamed Israel) then why would it be that his sons would turn out like that?

>how, exactly?
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
Matthew 26:27-28
Did His pouring out of His blood in the cup forgive sins? Did the atonement begin here? Clearly He is referencing the cross, where His blood would be poured for many.
>Then what of the foreshadowing of the Crucifixion, or the prophets telling of the Messiah?
This is hardly parallel. It's a big stretch to connect this with the Supper.
>Are these invalid, because they happen chronologically before the events that have taken place?
The fulfillments are so clear that anyone familiar with the prophecies would read it and go "Oh, that's what it is about!" yet there is no such unity between John 6 and John 13
>What do you think the passage is?
Verse 54 says "Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.", yet no one has ever believed eating the Eucharist guranteed without fail that you would be saved. But plenty have believed that of faith, and how fitting then that Jesus own interpretation of His own words is that to eat His flesh and drink His blood is faith. As verse 35 says, "Jesus said to them, 'I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.'"

How do Gnostic beliefs diminish the name of Christ if they practically hold that Christ is an emanation of a power that encompasses the universe and more than the universe?

That he speaks a truth that would lead to a returning to that fountain of light?

God damn you fags are cucked, this whole thread is why Islam is spreading like wildfire

Hubris. And the old testament god is evil, he enjoys causing his followers to suffer.

(OP)

“I am trying to prevent anyone from saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him … “I’m ready to accept Christ as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic, on the level with a man who says he is a poached egg, or else he would be the very Devil of hell. You must make your choice; either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a mad man or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come up with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.” … C.S. Lewis

False equivalency derived from a book which has had innumerable revisions and iterations.

“I know men; and I tell you that Jesus Christ is not a man. Superficial minds see a resemblance between Christ and the founders of empires, and the gods of other religions. That resemblance does not exist. There is between Christianity and whatever other religions the distance of infinity. Everything in Christ astonishes me. His spirit overawes me, and His will confounds me. Between Him and whoever else in the world, there is no possible term of comparison. He is truly a being by Himself. His ideas and sentiments, the Truth which He announces, His manner of convincing, are not explained either by human organization of by the ordinary nature of things. The nearer I approach, the more carefully I examine, everything is above me - everything remains grand, of a grandeur which overpowers. His religion is a revelation from an intelligence which is certainly not that of man. One can absolutely find nowhere, but in Him alone, the imitation or the example of His life. I search in vain through history to find the similar to Jesus Christ, or anything which can approach the gospel. Neither history, nor humanity, nor the ages, nor nature, offer me anything with which I am able to compare or explain it. Here everything is extraordinary.” … Napoleon Bonaparte

it's taking over because it's the same god as judaism and christianity, lot of people who can't think for themselves worshipping gods that force them into strict morality codes that go against nature and make them weak and easy to control instead of realizing that if they really need religion dionysus is superior

>Did His pouring out of His blood in the cup forgive sins? Did the atonement begin here? Clearly He is referencing the cross, where His blood would be poured
The crucifixion transcends time, all of Christ's life does, as the natural result of the uniting of his temporal human nature with the infinite, timeless Divine. You today have access to the crucifixion at any point in your life for the same reason.
>This is hardly parallel
>The fulfillments are so clear
subjective. The connection were clear enough for christians for hundreds of years

>yet no one has ever believed eating the Eucharist guranteed without fail that you would be saved

Not if it is profaned, of course. Receiving it thusly would be committing a sin during the process.

ARIANS GET OUT

>The crucifixion transcends tim
Did it not take place in time?
>You today have access to the crucifixion
Yes to the merits of the crucifixion, but the question is when this atonement was made. Was it at the Last Supper or at the cross?
>subjective
No, it is objective.
>christians for hundreds of years
Meme, myth, and irrelevancy.
>Not if it is profaned, of course
Well then, this must not be the Eucharist, because He says He WILL raise them up on the last day. This is because His sacrifice, unlike the blood of goats or of the eating of bread, perfects all those who are being sanctified.

>How do Gnostic beliefs diminish the name of Christ
Gnostics worship the goddess, and say YHVH is a demiurge and evil. Gnosticism teaches that there have been many Christs, and Jesus is merely one of them along with people like Buddha.

It's a subversion of Christianity by bringing in eastern mysticism from pajeet.

The Eucharist remains unchanged. The sinner does not. Receiving it in a state of sin leaves one in a greater state of sin. Why would God increase grace when the very action increases sin?

Christ himself said he would come again, who is to say he hadn't existed before? The eternal Christ in the form of a sort of Hegelian dialectic.

From my own reading of the bible, as I am not a Christian, I came to the conclusion that yahweh is evil. On the other hand, Gnosticism doesn't necessarily argue that the demiurge is evil as it is not a centralized theology, views of the demiurge can vary from being evil to being ignorant.

Does Jesus save to the uttermost, or does Jesus try and fail to save?

Meanwhile in early christianity

"This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God's Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus."

"First Apology", Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155.

"God has therefore announced in advance that all the sacrifices offered in His name, which Jesus Christ offered, that is, in the Eucharist of the Bread and of the Chalice, which are offered by us Christians in every part of the world, are pleasing to Him."

"Dialogue with Trypho", Ch. 117, circa 130-160 A.D.

Moreover, as I said before, concerning the sacrifices which you at that time offered, God speaks through Malachias, one of the twelve, as follows: 'I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices from your hands; for from the rising of the sun until its setting, my name has been glorified among the gentiles; and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a clean offering: for great is my name among the gentiles, says the Lord; but you profane it.' It is of the sacrifices offered to Him in every place by us, the gentiles, that is, of the Bread of the Eucharist and likewise of the cup of the Eucharist, that He speaks at that time; and He says that we glorify His name, while you profane it."

-"Dialogue with Trypho", [41: 8-10]

Well they were bad in the beginning but they learned their lesson once they reunited with Joseph when they came to Egypt and realized he was the Pharaoh's right hand man and had governmental authority. And all the Hebrews after the 12 tribe Patriarchs were disobedient to God and usually bounced back and forth to obedience when it benefited them immediately, like if God's presence (a cloud) was near their camp or towns, they never knew He was watching them all the time not just when the cloud was there, so they would commit sin when they thought they were in the clear. And they even had a failsafe for that too with the animal sacrifices. I don't know if you have a denomination, but the Catholics of America have the same mindset as the Israelites. They do all the bad stuff they want, but it's ok! They just confess it to the priest, do the prayers, and they're ok to do bad things next couple of days. This model is far from what God desires. The lesson to be learned from the Israelites is that we aren't supposed to be like them. We are supposed to enjoy following Jesus' commands and teachings. Because it all boils down to loving everyone else more than you love yourself. If you serve yourself you will cheat God and others out of what you could be giving them. Which is what the Israelites did, they served themselves because to their knowledge they knew that the animals would take their sin away. So they sinned all they wanted instead of trying to avoid sin.

New Testament God must be evil too, Jesus said we will suffer great tribulation and will be persecuted for His sake.

>Malaysian
Opinion discarded

Is this heading to a Sola Fide discussion?

Irenaeus denies sola fide here

Jesus saves and only takes half damage.

>cannot handle the truth

The topic of justification is intertwined with the mass.

We will, at the hands of the Jew. We will work for them enslaved by their material illusions for centuries to come.

And we know that sola fide is denied by the early church fathers

Protestants hate the early church fathers

"So then, if the mixed cup and the manufactured bread receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, that is to say, the Blood and Body of Christ, which fortify and build up the substance of our flesh, how can these people claim that the flesh is incapable of receiving God's gift of eternal life, when it is nourished by Christ's Blood and Body and is His member? As the blessed apostle says in his letter to the Ephesians, 'For we are members of His Body, of His flesh and of His bones' (Eph. 5:30). He is not talking about some kind of 'spiritual' and 'invisible' man, 'for a spirit does not have flesh an bones' (Lk. 24:39). No, he is talking of the organism possessed by a real human being, composed of flesh and nerves and bones. It is this which is nourished by the cup which is His Blood, and is fortified by the bread which is His Body. The stem of the vine takes root in the earth and eventually bears fruit, and 'the grain of wheat falls into the earth' (Jn. 12:24), dissolves, rises again, multiplied by the all-containing Spirit of God, and finally after skilled processing, is put to human use. These two then receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, which is the Body and Blood of Christ."

-"Five Books on the Unmasking and Refutation of the Falsely

Named Gnosis". Book 5:2, 2-3, circa 180 A.D. "For just as the bread which comes from the earth, having received the invocation of God, is no longer ordinary bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly, so our bodies, having received the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, because they have the hope of the resurrection."

-"Five Books on the Unmasking and Refutation of the Falsely named Gnosis". Book 4:18 4-5, circa 180 A.D.