The Father Of Roman Catholicism, Emperor Constatine The Great

I’ve told you what the Church teaches, I can’t do any better than that.

Ok, believe what you want. Dogma has only to do with faith and morals. Those statements are pastoral commentary.

the bread and wine in context to what Jesus said did not literally become Hid Blood and body. No, I do not believe in the false teaching of " transubstantiation" why? Because paul provided more clarity in 1cor 11:23-16


23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you:

that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread;

24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”

25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.

what is the meaning of the Lord's Supper?

1. to remember Hid death and suffering on the cross for us
2. to proclaim His death until He comes. meaning faith in His resurrection i.e. The Gospel.

Now the Pope doesn't mean what he prays and the RCC doesn't believe what they teach? You say you have not prayed to Mary in a long time yet also say one doesn't have to pray to her if they don't want to Yet you will argue it is Biblical while denying your leader instructs the RCC to do so. What a Joke.

So your holy father violated your church teaching.

Your belief is inconsistent with the clear words Christ spoke in John Ch 6. “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”.

“For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.”

Undeniable

“Do this in remembrance of me” was Christ instructing his disciples (his ministers of his church) to do what Jesus did at the last supper. Every single early Christian source that wrote about this subject agreed it was the flesh and blood of Christ.

Nope, you misunderstood him. He could have been more clear to be fair.

The RCC interprets "Many" things differently, without scriptural support

Just A Few Examples In False Teachings Below

Is Jesus literally found in the sacrament both actual body and blood, the doctrine of transubstantiation? (NO)

Is there an actual place called purgatory, where prayers can be made to elevate this person from a purgatory to heaven after death? (NO)

Is Roman Catholicism the one true church upon earth? (NO)

Is the Pope the Vicar Of Christ, the mediator between God and Man? (NO)

All of it has scriptural support, you just don’t agree with the interpretations.

He was speaking of His ability to give eternal life.
Don't you find is strange the only one who spoke about the Lord's supper after Jesus ascended was Paul? The only place you see it even talked about is in 1cor 11?

BUT as far as Salvation goes Faith in death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ are paramount. Yet none of the epistles even mention it or needing to be done for salvation? You have taken what is descriptive and honoring the death of Christ on the cross and made it something the word doesn't say.

You agree with Jesus when it fits your belief and you disagree with Jesus when it doesn’t.

I disagree with most of what you said. Fortunately the largest Christian Church on earth will go on without you agreeing with it.

LOL no. the bread and wine do not become the literal blood and body of Jesus no more than the water in Baptism becomes the grave.



Jesus said I am the door HIs a real Door?

to those in the rcc all are wrong including the word of God because their tradition is just as authoritative as God's word.

I tell you what, since you claim this is so obviously a metaphor...can you name any early Christian to ever challenge this “heresy” the Catholic Church promotes? Any early Christian will suffice. There are a multitude to choose from.

Christian Church?

As Much As Mormonism Or The Jehovah's Witnesses Are The Christian Church

Roman Catholicism Is Another Gospel And Doctrine, No Pope, Seven Sacraments, Traditions, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, Prayer to Mary, Or Saints Are Needed

Faith Alone, In The Finished Work On Calvary

The Catholic Church preceded your Church. You have to be able to trace the leadership of your Church back to the apostles in order to establish the basis that it is the church Christ founded. Christ didn’t found his church in the 16th century or later.

I’m asking for you to prove that. What is a name of a Christian I can go read about that said he/she belonged to “The Way”.

Obviously he pray to mary

O Mary... we entrust our health to you

It is clear he pray to Mary

Now to be clear, I am saying metaphorically/symbolically in context to the "last supper" not everything in the word of God is figurative, literal, symbolic, Allegory, or prophetic. The context is established and authorial intent from all scripture both Old and New Testament. it is not either-or it is all contextually.


it is too, dishonest to say " can you name any early Christian to ever challenge this “heresy” the Catholic Church promotes? ".

The early church had many issues as Paul addressed them as there was with the Lord Supper in 1cor chapter 11.

Many issues were addressed after the Apostles of Christ died for example the deity of Christ. The Church needs time and the word of God to receive correction, clarity to what is godly. Gnosticism rose it's ugly head again.

Now to say :

"can you name any early Christian to ever challenge this “heresy” the Catholic Church promotes? ".

Well, can you name when THE EARLY CHURCH started teaching the doctrine Transubstantiuon? NO. MANY ERRORS IN THE CHURCH TOOK TIME TO ADDRESS.

The word “eucharist” means “thanksgiving” and was an early Christian way of referring to the celebration of the Lord’s Table.

Believers in the early centuries of church history regularly celebrated the Lord’s Table as a way to commemorate the death of Christ. The Lord Himself commanded this observance on the night before His death. As the apostle Paul recorded in 1 Corinthians 11:23–26:

the church fathers who you hold their writing as authoritative said :

Tertullian clarified his understanding of the Lord’s Table by noting that the bread and the cup were symbols of Christ’s body and blood. In that same vein, we find that many of the church fathers similarly clarified their understanding of the eucharist by describing it in symbolic and spiritual terms.


Justin Martyr (110–165) spoke of “the bread which our Christ gave us to offer in remembrance of the Body which He assumed for the sake of those who believe in Him, for whom He also suffered, and also to the cup which He taught us to offer in the Eucharist, in commemoration of His blood"(Dialogue with Trypho, 70).

Origen similarly noted, “We have a symbol of gratitude to God in the bread which we call the Eucharist” (Against Celsus, 8.57).

Athanasius (296–373) similarly contended that the elements of the Eucharist are to be understood spiritually, not physically: “[W]hat He says is not fleshly but spiritual. For how many would the body suffice for eating, that it should become the food for the whole world? But for this reason He made mention of the ascension of the Son of Man into heaven, in order that He might draw them away from the bodily notion, and that from henceforth they might learn that the aforesaid flesh was heavenly eating from above and spiritual food given by Him.” (Festal Letter, 4.19)

it would appear those of the early church fathers agreed with the word of God and Paul. Not the RCC of today

Words matter. Symbols, remembrance and commemorative do not transfer to become the blood and body of Jesus Literally.

You are in error. Take your church father's word for it if you won't take Pauls.