Eucharist

Is believing that the bread and wine literally turns into the body and blood required as Orthodox and Catholic?

Other urls found in this thread:

churchmilitant.com/news/article/eucharistic-miracle-confirmed-in-poland
catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/the-real-presence)
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Corinthians 11:23-29
youtube.com/watch?v=uv_2x6JmuaE
youtube.com/watch?v=RI4lkqYzJvM
youtube.com/watch?v=Dlr90NLDp-0
youtube.com/watch?v=HxjYWvF5ttc
youtube.com/watch?v=WhP654dN3Ww
youtube.com/watch?v=4ych_dTX8G0
youtube.com/watch?v=oX9xVnHYFAM
youtube.com/watch?v=C_gaT-tnpKk
youtube.com/watch?v=n-5mx5o8YYs
youtube.com/watch?v=Wf3scPRLGFE
youtube.com/watch?v=AKpexxzR4Ak
youtube.com/watch?v=o6JJCaf9e7c
youtube.com/watch?v=mNMQu5LXaeI
youtube.com/watch?v=EJxRDhejtwo
youtube.com/watch?v=_dV5b8AuLHg
youtube.com/watch?v=YRhRzdiCk7s
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>believes all the magical shit in the bible
>oh except for this but that's okay

>you have to believe
>believing is a choice
>facts are a choice*

please gargle balls

It is a Dogma of Roman Catholicism and is given as a belief that must be believed as a faithful Catholic. Contrast with Doctrines, which are taught but not as a necessary belief.

Given that the Church doesn't excommunicate for disagreement with dogma, it is 'required' but you can probably pretend to be a loyal Catholic and still promulgate that the Eucharist isn't literal with no ministerial penalty.
I can't speak to Orthodoxy.

Thank you for an actual answer. Trying to learn some things about Christianity and pol is the best place I have found to discuss religion. Raised in an atheist household so I am ignorant of many Christian beliefs. Is the Bible also to be taken literally or are some stories more of a lesson than a literal happening?

>Given that the Church doesn't excommunicate for disagreement with dogma, it is 'required' but you can probably pretend to be a loyal Catholic and still promulgate that the Eucharist isn't literal with no ministerial penalty.
Right, only divine penalty. Don't take the Eucharist if you are convinced it is not His Body.

As a child I went to a service with my grandma. My mom and I didn't know anything about the Eucharist and took it because we saw everyone else doing it (we weren't right beside my grandma so she didn't get to inform us not to). What is divine penalty and does it apply to what we did?

>Is the Bible also to be taken literally or are some stories more of a lesson than a literal happening?
Opinions differ

You are not supposed to take the Eucharist if you are not a member of the Church, or are in a state of Mortal Sin. Taking it despite a sincere and utter conviction it is otherwise, (opposed to mere doubt which all people experience) would be a sin. The degree of this is probably dependent on whether you were baptized, and your own level of ignorance on the subject (not knowing what you are doing would likely diminish your guilt.) But the point still stands, if God exists as believed by the Catholic Church, you have offended the Eucharist, and would need to confess this. The Divine punishment is only known to the Divine, so I can't speak on the specifics.

Does it differ by denomination or do people of the same group, let's say Catholics, have differing opinions within the same church?

Former Catholic here. It is declared to be literal heresy to say it is otherwise. Catholics literally believe their priest is a shaman with alchemist abilities. Dumbest form of Christianity by far.

If I am not Catholic but would like to confess just to be respectful, would that be a good or bad thing?

Confession to a priest was only implemented by Jews so they could have power to blackmail those in powerful positions. Only Jesus is allowed to forgive sins.

>Does it differ by denomination or do people of the same group, let's say Catholics, have differing opinions within the same church?
Both. Varies among Churches, but also within Churches.
Baptists are the most literal. Catholics probably around the middle.

God performs the transubstantiation. I don't see why it's hard to believe in, if one believes in God.

Jesus grants the power to forgive sins to Peter, who founded the Catholic Church.

Its a interesting sentiment, to be honest. If you don't believe in God and the Eucharist, at least as described in Catholic theology, why bother making amends? The divine punishment would not exist, so you would only be making amends for offending a human belief system, rather then a Divine Truth.

I am catholic however so of course I think that it is a good sentiment that you want to make amends, and moreover view it you, deep down, coming to terms with the actual Truth in the universe. Apologize to God personally, but for a true, valid confession you have to be brought into the church, so convert, heretic.

>Catholics literally believe their priest is a shaman with alchemist abilities
Its understood that the priest accomplishes this with the aid of the Holy Spirit, as are all Sacraments. To believe that God can alter the nature of things that He Himself creates is entirely consistent with omnipotency.

Because it denies all empiricism and reason. Its one thing to be faithful, it's another to be completely in denial.

Peter in his bravado granted himself that power. He was Jewish after all, even if he loved Christ.

What empiricism?
Catholics don't deny that the outward matter and appearance of the wine is as wine. So empiricism can't say anything about it

>not being a proddie

No doubt many felt the same in regards dying Christ. "He is a good man sure, but not God."

So you don't believe the Scriptures?

No He didn't. Confessions, the pope, etc. are not biblical in any way. Catholicism is cancer.

are you twelve

Read John 20:22-23

Those things aren't as important to Catholics as you think. Yes, even the pope. Seriously.

Jesus was god. Saying bread and wine are literally flesh and blood is false equivalence. It doesn't add anything at all and is a bizarre ritual. Knock it off.

Wtf how can something be outwardly and inwardly different? What does that even mean? All I see is words. Parroting different ways of saying the same thing doesn't change that you're speaking gibberish

Read John 6:51-57

I believe that it would be better to stop trying to grasp reality from a fucking book and live here on earth.

>Is believing that the bread and wine literally turns into the body and blood required as Orthodox and Catholic?

No its cannibalism. Not really my fetish but meh to each his own.

>Jesus was god. Saying bread and wine are literally flesh and blood is false equivalence. It doesn't add anything at all and is a bizarre ritual. Knock it off.
Right, and you have yet to address my point. To every empirical measurement, the bloodied, wounded, and eventually dead body of Christ would surely have been denied to be God. Yet we know otherwise. This is the arrogance of protestants, ion the sense that you only want enough mystery until it becomes uncomfortable for you.

Christ humbles himself though his Incarnation? Fine.
Christ humbles himself by being born, not made like Adam? Fine.
Christ humbles himself by being a child? Fine.
Christ humbles himself though poverty? Fine.
Christ humbles himself by being baptized by John? Fine
Christ humbles himself by taking our sins upon his shoulders? Fine
Christ humbles himself by being mocked, abused, tortured, spit on, whipped, beaten? Fine
Christ humbles himself by being subject to world authority, and a false trial at that?
Christ humbles himself by dying, naked, on a cross, between thieves? Fine.
Christ humbles himself by having his heart ruptured? Fine
Christ humbles himself by becoming the Eucharist? NO this is too far!


Christ's humility is utterly complete and unfathomable. We worship this expression of mercy made consummate in the Eucharist.

Have you even read it, then? You shouldn't express opinions on who's allowed to forgive sins if you aren't sure

The belief is a transformation in substance not appearance. It transforms in a manner present to us.

Just did. He's speaking about spiritual hunger and spiritual thirst. You cannot actually think that bible is literal surface level bullshit. A child would read this and take it literally. God does not call us to take life at the surface level. Please try to do better and learn what metaphor is.

...

...

This will probably be buried in amongst the waves of shit but whatever:
I went to a Catholic philosophy lecture a few weeks ago and they told me that the belief is that the belief in objects is generally that of substance and properties. If you see an apple, it has a property of being green, another of being kinda round, around 100 grams and so on. It's substance is of being an apple. For example, say you changed a property of the apple, and now it was red instead of green, the property would have changed but the substance there would still be an apple.

Anyway, it is believed that when we take the bread and wine, their Properties stay the same as the bread and wine, however when they are the Eucharist, they now have the substance of body and blood

Exactly how does being clumps of bread and wine humble christ? Sounds like materialism to me.

It's mysterious to everyone.
But it must be similar to how the underlying reality of Jesus was God, though the outward signs were of man. The underlying reality of the wine is the blood of Jesus

The same way His Incarnation does, unless you are so utterly convinced of the worth of man's nature you DON'T think becoming a man is humbling for God.

Also, you sound like gnostic. Christ had a physical body.

>are interracial marriages valid in the eyes of the Lord?
>not expressly confirmed

WRONG WRONG WRONG

>Mocking pol for calling cucks racemixing degenerates
OY vey

It's not a metaphor. He rather had His followers desert Him (thinking him a cannibal) than relent. He's humble, not proud; He would have explained it if they'd just misread Him.
Instead he asked f his apostles- 'will you also leave me?'

It's a representation. It isn't literal.

PART 1

People want to claim that the bible says it's okay to have an interracial marriage because the reason for forbidding it is based off of religious conversion.

Note that the only exceptions to these marriages werent true interracial marriages.

Boaz married a white woman, a Moabite
And Moses marriaed also a white woman, a Midianite (children of Abraham) who lived in Cush.

I can go on but every exception is a white person.

Furthermore in Ezra 10 marriage with foreign women is forbidden, Ezra commands all the Jewish men to divorce their forign wives and "put away" their children. Regardless of their RELIGION


>We have broken faith with our God and have married foreign women from the peoples of the land, but even now there is hope for Israel in spite of this.
>Therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all these wives and their children, according to the counsel of my lord and of those who tremble at the commandment of our God, and let it be done according to the Law.


Nehemiah also mentions this also and the loss of language with it.


>In those days also I saw the Jews who had married women of Ashdod, Ammon, and Moab. 24 And half of their children spoke the language of Ashdod, and they could not speak the language of Judah, but only the language of each people. 25 And I confronted them and cursed them and beat some of them and pulled out their hair. And I made them take an oath in the name of God, saying, “You shall not give your daughters to their sons, or take their daughters for your sons or for yourselves. 26 Did not Solomon king of Israel sin on account of such women? Among the many nations there was no king like him, and he was beloved by his God, and God made him king over all Israel. Nevertheless, foreign women made even him to sin. 27 Shall we then listen to you and do all this great evil and act treacherously against our God by marrying foreign women?”

Yes. It is absolutely central to the belief of true christianity. If you have doubts look at this: churchmilitant.com/news/article/eucharistic-miracle-confirmed-in-poland

btw this proves that catholicism is the true religion and all other religions are falsehood.

PART 2
This is in Joshua don't you think this curse applies to our nations today?

>For if you turn back and cling to the remnant of these nations remaining among you and make marriages with them, so that you associate with them and they with you, 13 know for certain that the Lord your God will no longer drive out these nations before you, but they shall be a snare and a trap for you, a whip on your sides and thorns in your eyes, until you perish from off this good ground that the Lord your God has given you.

Do you think Jamal and Achmed would lead your sons out of degeneracy and to the light of God?

No


>Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.

>“You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed.

Kind means species.

Doth God take care for cattle and seed?
1 Corinthians 9:9 - we are to live by the spirit of the law.
>For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?

>Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

>Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
>This is the first and great commandment.
>And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
>On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

PART 3

>Thus I cleansed them from everything foreign, and I established the duties of the priests and Levites, each in his work.

Additionally, religious conversion is not enough except for a very select few WHITE women. Marriage with another tribe is forbidden on the basis of their history and treatment of God's people. Blacks and Arabs are a cruel lot and always have been. Arabs are not spoken well of in the Scriptures. No verses explicitly banned marriage with them, simply because no Israelite would never think of even doing it. The only temptation was with the Canaanites and a handful of other groups.


>Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

>Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Literally every shitskin group you can think of has been totally wicked to White nations. They have sinned the sin of Amelek. Therefore it is totally totally totally fucking BANNED.

Furthermore My interpretation has the backing of Ezra and Nehemiah who ADDED to those laws. Forbidding Egyptian marriages, by name, and ALL foreign marriages regardless of religious conversion. Which is more than "just Canaanites who are converted". If it was true that you can marry anyone except pagan Canaanites then God would have struck down Ezra and Nehemiah, instead his words today are SCRIPTURE.

Furthurmore Noah cursed Ham, and his sons of Canaan with a slave mentality. Because Ham had it, and like father like son. With the exception of his decedents who were in Egypt and WHITE (remember Ramasees had red hair). It would be fucking wrong to marry the children of Ham, because you will almost almost almost always give that curse to your own son.

This curse is very real because the Arabs are at least half Hamite, the blacks and Chinks are full hamites. And poo in the loos.

the bible is susceptible of different interpretations, it is up to you and your faith to take the lesson in your way

PART 4

>But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:

>But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee:

>When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;
>And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:
>Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.

>When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations.
>There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch.
>Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
>For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee.
>Thou shalt be perfect with the Lord thy God.
>For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the Lord thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.

PART 5

>Now go and smite Aguyk, and utterly destroy all that they (the Amelekites) have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

-You have a right as a nation to completely remove a race of men who are ruining yours.


> Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.

-Furthermore you should not marry into them

>Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. Thou shalt not do so unto the Lord thy God: for every abomination to the Lord, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods.

-Furthermore you should not do worship in degeneracy, meaning as they do.

>Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

-The only white women that submit will be Christians.

>He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

-Cuckoldry is forbidden.

>A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

-"Bastard" is the hebrew translation for MAMZER which literally means in hebrew racemixed child

>When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.

-You as a race and tribe are to have separate, unique, and individual nations. It is demanded by God

>Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

-The Messiah said we are to obey the Law

This is a lie. The pope's first duty is to promote the church so that it gains power. Sickening institution.
I actually like that you are admitting it is myterious (ie doesn't make sense) so why claim that man knows it meant Jesus wants us to digest his body in our stomachs then shit him out our assholes? Wtf?
This. All it does in reality is turn away the more intelligent because they see it as bizarre and dogmatic like islam. More damage than good is done.
The lessons of the bible are self evident to those that are pure and humble and have no hubris.
This tells me you aren't very bright. Christ only spoke in metaphors so that the truths revealed were directly proportional to your logical and spiritual intelligence. He did not want people to eat him literally.
This
Fuck right off "muh chosen people" meme is a cancer on the world.

Be careful senpai, taking communion in an unworthy manner is the sentence of death.

So it is very serious. Think about it carefully.
And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep (are dead).

>he thinks God isn't mysterious
>he thinks there aren't thousands of Bible interpretations, each claiming to be obvious (hence thousands of Prot churches)
>he thinks he's smarter than the early Church Fathers (catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/the-real-presence)

Also see biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Corinthians 11:23-29
Not referring to faith, but actually drinking the blood of the covenant

Due to the progression of education and short term evolution of humanitiy's culture, I am in fact way smarter than the early church founders. My interpretation is the only correct interpretation.

>I actually like that you are admitting it is myterious
If you think that the Trinity, or the Hypostatic union is not mysterious then buddy, either your God, in heaven, or incredibly arrogant. The Divine Nature is unknowable to men, to assume otherwise is spiritual pride.
>so why claim that man knows it meant Jesus wants us to digest his body in our stomachs
its is a physical and spiritual transformation, as Christ is both a physical and spiritual redeemer. Moreover, Christ's incarnation, again, is evidence that the salvation requires corporality.

>This. All it does in reality is turn away the more intelligent because they see it as bizarre and dogmatic like islam. More damage than good is done.

this is funny in light of this

>The lessons of the bible are self evident to those that are pure and humble and have no hubris.

you have hubris by assuming everything must be comfortable to your sensibilities. God desires us to be like children in maters regarding Him.

>Due to the progression of education and short term evolution of humanitiy's culture, I am in fact way smarter than the early church founders. My interpretation is the only correct interpretation.

and now I am convinced you are baiting us.

"Magic" is just unknown means. You sound like a neanderthal scoffing at the idea of modern technology.

>Jesus wants us to digest his body in our stomachs then shit him out our assholes? Wtf?

BLASPHEMY Be polite about the Lord plebbit.

>Christ only spoke in metaphors

Jesus told Peter to buy two swords and he did. That's not a metaphor. Pleb

And what evidence do you have that I am not God? I assume you don't believe you are God because of your life experiences, but you cannot claim to know who or what I am. I could be a shitposter, or I could be Christ incarnate. To claim you know precisely which it is is to claim omniscience in yourself, which means you are declaring yourself to be God. I have no spiritual pride, I have no pride at all, just love for God and his glory.

Well, for one, God wouldn't deny the Eucharist.

The first sword is the physical sword, the second sword is the word. There are two planes of reality: our physical world as we perceive through our senses, and then there is the world we have created through spoken word. They are both separated as information cannot be expressly tied to anything material. An apple is red but redness is not given to us by the apple but by our mind's eye.

>I could be Christ incarnate
>I have no pride at all

PTTFFF

God isn't an edgelord.

kek

>And what evidence do you have that I am not God?
By definition, God isn't stupid.

You claim to know what God would say, which is to once again claim omniscience in yourself. Who is the spiritually prideful one here?

>Raised in an atheist household so I am ignorant of many Christian beliefs.
Hardcore Catholics literally believe in what they call "transubstansiation". Meaning they believe that though the waifer and grape juice you're given during the Eucharist are in fact just that- crackers and juice- when they enter your body the power of The Holy Spirit transforms them into the actual body and blood of Christ.

They believe a miracle happens that for some reason you can't see or document, but it definitely happens.

As far as the literal interpretation of the Bible goes... it kind of depends on who you talk to. That includes Priests and Nuns. The Church has an ever changing "official stance" but most people in practice are "cafeteria Catholics". Meaning they like belonging to THE CHURCH but also like to pick and choose what parts of the Bible and dogma they personally believe.

The mortal human claiming to be God would be more spiritually prideful. Disgusting really.

>planes of reality

plane refers to a flat earth, planet refers to a globe earth dummy.

>more bullshit


> And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough


IF the second wasn't real he wouldn't have told Peter either that it was enough or to but it back in it's sheath after he cut off the solder's ear

By definition, not an argument. You must first tell me how I am stupid before claiming you know that I am stupid. I don't even need to claim divinity to say that. Sounds like somones a little butthurt

I'm not arguing I'm without pride, bud, you are.

All propositions are syllogisms which, by definition, are arguments. I take it you don't know what an argument is.

The Eucharist seems to me more metaphorical based on:
John 6:51 - I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
I don't think Jesus is literally bread, or that the bread is literally Jesus' flesh. In fact, that's really kinda creepy to me. Jesus' sacrifice is holy sustenance so the soul can survive.

Just like the mortal Jesus claiming to be God. I suppose he is disgusting too? Or blasphemous, as the Jews called him. Congratulations, you are one with those that denied Christ.

>planes refer to flat earth
>arguing semantics like an infant

Truth is truth, alway has, always will be. Christ IS God, so Him claiming it is not sinful. You are clearly not God, and thus claiming it is.

While it is scientifically known that blood once removed from the body soon coagulates and eventually spoils, and since this natural reaction was common knowledge among the medical faculty of the Middle Ages, a claim made by them of remarkable liquefacations can hardly be ignored and would seem to indicate a transcendence of their experience. And In our own day, the specimens that are still active are no less scientifically inexplicable than they were centuries ago, even amidst intense scientific investigation.

The best known and most intensely studied is the yearly blood miracle of St. Januarius (St. Gennaro) that occurs is Naples each year. The recurring miracle of the liquefaction of his blood 18 times a year is often reported in the secular as well as the religious press, and is the occasion of great gatherings in the Cathedral of Naples. Here the people pray fervently while the resident cardinal, who usually presides over the ceremony, holds the vials of blood. The miracle occurs when the bust reliquary containing the head of the saint is brought near. When the liquefaction is accomplished in full view of the spectators, the cardinal announces, "The miracle has happened," words that cause great rejoicing and the chanting of the Te Deum.

Familiar with miracles?

All arguments are semantics. Go hit yourself in the heaad repeatedly until you have a decent, original idea.

How do you know I'm "clearly not god" other than by your own parameters? Your "proof" was my denial of the eucharist, and that is all you have. It is clear to me that the bible itself doesnt say anywhere "get priests to perform alchemy on the properties of bread and wine and eat it or else you are going to hell"

The saint's history begins with the Roman Emperor Diocletian whose persecution during the dawning years of the fourth century made martyrs of innumerable Christians. Among his victims was counted St. [Januarius, who was serving as bishop of Benevento. The imprisonment of the bishop occurred in A.D. 305 when he journeyed to Pozzuoli to offer encouragement to Sossius, a deacon who had been imprisoned. The bishop was soon arrested together with several ministers who had labored beside the saint in the service of the Church. After their decapitation the bodies were removed to various cities. St. Januarius’ body was taken to Benevento, then to Monte Vergine and lastly to Naples where it was entombed in the main church of the city, with two vials of his blood that had been collected by devout followers. Around this tomb the great ca¬thedral was constructed. Here Januarius was honorably remembered by the faithful of the city.

In the 14th century there occurred a phenomenon that was to attract curiosity throughout the centuries until even today the happenings pro¬voke worldwide interest:
The year was 1389. A procession was making its way about the ca¬thedral when the priest holding the flasks containing the saint's coagulated blood noticed that the contents began to liquefy and bubble. Since then the blood has repeated this phenomenon 18 times each year: on the Saturday before the first Sunday in May and the eight days fol¬lowing; on the feast of the saint, September 19, and during the octave, and on December 16.

That's the only meaning of the word in any technical manner, You are using it like a pleb.

UNless you feel like discussing flat earth then don't use the word "plane" or "planar" since it refers to an entire world where it is a flat surface.

Don't ruin words again edgelord

Except if it was a metaphor he would have explained rather than have people leave the Church

this is not ironic

No all arguments are not semantics. Reality is separate from the word and therefore my senses telling me that bread and wine is still bread and wine after your alchemists say their magic spells is not semantics.

>ignoring people's posts when they try to explain things to you
Really disrespectful

Just as Christ disrespected the rabbis I am disrespecting you. Clearly your hubris blinds you.

youtube.com/watch?v=uv_2x6JmuaE
youtube.com/watch?v=RI4lkqYzJvM
youtube.com/watch?v=Dlr90NLDp-0
youtube.com/watch?v=HxjYWvF5ttc
youtube.com/watch?v=WhP654dN3Ww
youtube.com/watch?v=4ych_dTX8G0
youtube.com/watch?v=oX9xVnHYFAM
youtube.com/watch?v=C_gaT-tnpKk
youtube.com/watch?v=n-5mx5o8YYs
youtube.com/watch?v=Wf3scPRLGFE
youtube.com/watch?v=AKpexxzR4Ak
youtube.com/watch?v=o6JJCaf9e7c
youtube.com/watch?v=mNMQu5LXaeI
youtube.com/watch?v=EJxRDhejtwo
youtube.com/watch?v=_dV5b8AuLHg
youtube.com/watch?v=YRhRzdiCk7s


>tips fedora

You're really not a nice person, and I already explained why your senses say it's bread and wine.

Jesus was the least nice person. He pointed out peoples sins which was frankly insulting to those people. I am comfortable doing the same.

You're not God, you're a blasphemous weirdo who doesn't know the Bible

Well, relativism is irreconcilable from God. Yet you seem to be using its tenants as an argument.

Christ refers to the Eucharist in literal terms.

He didn't disrespect all the Rabbis. There were three that he dearly loved that come to my mind.

1. John the Baptist
2. Gamaliel
3. Hillel

Although 2 and 3 are not expliciltly noted by Jesus, he agreed with them all the time. As far as our records go. And Paul was a student of Gamaliel, although Paul was a zealot initially Gamaliel was not

But Jesus didn't ask people to explain things, ignore them, and then go back to saying
> 'it's magic priests haha it doesn't TASTE LIKE BLOOD Christianity BTFO'
That's what YOU DO, which there is no reason for.

You're going to have to elaborate because all I'm seeing is more gibberish. What do you mean by me using tenants of relatavism? And even so, is not all relative to God?

Well that's good that you know that.

And again I argue that Christ's Divinity was more often then not hidden within His humanity. Do you think the Transfiguration wasn't special? Most men could not distinguish the Divinity of Christ during His ministry, and you find this perfectly alright, yet cannot concede that this is also acceptable for the Eucharist.

Literally? Nah. Well when a priest blesses it by God and reminiscing with us what Jesus told us to do in the last supper, we assume it is his body and blood we are takin, as a rememberance of his sacrifice. Spiritually, yes. But literally? Cmon why is that a question

Relativism as in the sense truth is not subjective, or at the very least, unknowable. Truth is fixed and unchanging, as it finds it source in God, who Himself is eternal and outside of time.

> And even so, is not all relative to God?

No. God's Knowledge is eternal and perfect, and thus could not change. Moreover, the Logos is God, and Christ specifically.

But you shouldn't go around insulting people who don't deserve it though. You really are just edgey

The entirety of the Church rests one the veracity of the Eucharist. It is its literally Heart.

But it's not Jesus' literal body and blood. It's Wafers and wine. That's what OP was asking. Once in us, that's a different story and it spiritually is Jesus in us. "Take this cup, this is my blood, do this in memory of me" and we do.

I realize the irony of saying this, but- OH FOR THE LOVE OF GOD