Greg Koukl: Catholics and Communion

Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason answers the question, "How can we show Catholics are mistaken when they take Jesus literally when He talked about communion?"
#StandtoReason #Apologetics #Christianity
----- CONNECT -----
Website: www.str.org/
Stand to Reason University: training.str.org/
Stand to Reason Apps: www.str.org/apps
Twitter: / strtweets
Facebook: / standtoreason93
Instagram: / standtoreason
LinkedIn: / stand-to-reason
Have a question or comment? Call Greg Koukl, live Tuesdays 4-6pm Pacific Time, at [phone]. If you'd like to submit your question ahead of time for the broadcast, or if you'd like to submit a question for the #STRask podcast, fill out our form at www.str.org/br....
----- GIVE -----
Support the work of Stand to Reason: str.org/donate

[@Doyler3]

Hello Greg. Your video's are very honest. Thank you for that. Firstly, I am a Catholic. And yes, have been deeply engrained with this Dogma. But I would like to propose something. John 6:51-59 (or any of the discourse really) V. 52 Why did the Jews quarrel? And why doesn't Jesus just say this is a metaphor? V. 66 Why did many of the disciples leave if it was just a metaphor? Also, the Greek word used for "eat" here (v.54) is literally to "gnaw" or "munch". A metaphor doesn't work.

[@tysonguess]

I can't believe Greg would compare "I am the door" to "This is my body"....and I do really like Greg so don't get the wrong idea here. First, no one thought Jesus was talking literalistically when he said he was a door. Second, When Jesus taught that his followers must eat his body the apostles understood it literalistically - hence why they said, 'This is a hard teaching, Who can hear it?'. It would not be a hard teaching to say, 'This represents my body symbolically'. If the apostles had misunderstood this teaching, Jesus would have corrected them. In fact, in all other instances where the apostles misunderstood Jesus, He corrected them. He did not correct their literalistic understanding of this teaching which means they understood it the way that Jesus taught it. Hence, why every single successor trained and ordained by the apostles and every church father since has taught a literal interpretation. Greg, the gnostics taught your view and then the reformers...or at least Zwingli. If your interpretation cannot be found to be taught by the church then it is not the proper interpretation.

[@gilcostello3316]

Excellent, my friend.

[@joshlb9613]

As a Catholic, I appreciate the many defenses to the Holy Eucharist in the comments. It's sad that I hardly see as many Catholics defending the faith like this 12 years ago. This video, if anything, deepened my faith in the Eucharist being Jesus' Body and Blood. God bless you all. Viva Cristo Rei!

[@Jugglable]

When Jesus said they had to eat his flesh, even people who followed him closely turned and walked away. Wouldn't that have been a perfect time for Jesus to say he was just speaking metaphorically? He understood exactly how shocking it was. And that's how the entire church took it for 1700 years. And I wasn't "socialized" to believe that. I'm in my early 20's and just converted to Catholicism, thank God!

[@salvatoreshiggerino6810]

Nobody takes Jesus for a madman and leaves because of the other metaphors, why would they leave over this alleged metaphor? And if they were mistaken, why weren't they called back so he could clarify?

[@xAlexYousifx]

The whole conflict rests fundamentally on who has the authority to interpret scripture. We Catholics believe that the Catholic Church is the sole interpreter of sacred scripture, and In the absence of such an authoritative interpreter you get 30,000+ denominations, each with its own interpretations. So Greg, you are just propagating YOUR interpretation of scripture, which begs the question, on what basis should we accept one fallible man's interpretation over someone Else's?

[@andrewsapia]

from the beginning of the protestant movement there has been a trajectory away from this core sacrament so that in many churches today communion is a once a month event and is less and less sacred. Whereas it was the heart and soul of the service for 15 centuries.

[@khafh4002]

If you are going to use Scripture to argue against the actual Body and Blood, then you will fail. How do you explain the followers leaving Jesus when He said it was His Body and Blood? Why did Jesus let let walked and not correct them? "As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. So Jesus said to the twelve, "You do not want to go away also, do you?" Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life."…

[@andrewsapia]

what about the fathers? You cannot find a single church father that did not believe in the real presence. Don't you think those that were closest to the events, those who were regularly subject to martyrdom would get something so fundamental wrong.

[@NowaydudeOrg]

HOGWASH! Knock it off.

[@kraffty1]

Such claims are unwarranted. To claim that, "you cannot find a single church father that did not believe in the real presence," is classic overreach and preposterous. Have you actually looked at what the church fathers wrote concerning the elements? I have. Clement of Alexandria (150-215) clearly explained that the body and blood in John 6 are metaphors (The Instructor 1:6), further, he explains that communion wine is called wine (The Instructor 2:2). Tertullian (155-220) wrote that the communion bread represents Christ's body (Against Marcion 1:14) and like Clement before him, he clearly explained that John 6 was metaphorical (i.e. spiritual cf. John 6:63) (On the Resurrection and the Flesh, 37). There are others I could mention, but you wrote that there was not a single church father that did not believe in the real, literal, presence of Christ, and yet, I have cited two early church fathers whose writings suggest that they did not believe in the real presence of Christ in the communion elements.

[@Rosary-Crusader]

"Your fathers ate manna in the desert and they are dead" John 6:46, "Jesus replied to them: In all truth I tell you, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you."John 6:53 "After this, many of his disciples went away and accompanied him no more. Then Jesus said to the Twelve, 'What about you, do you want to go away too?'"John 6:66 Interesting at John 666, like many people of Jesus's time you do not want to Eat his flesh or Drink his blood.

[@gilcostello3316]

Mr. Houkl: your dedication to Our Lord is obvious, even when you're mistaken--your sincerity (love) comes through. I just want you to be clear that for Catholics, our radical belief in the Eucharist is the heart of our faith lives. If we toss that, we toss everything. Flannery O'Connor, a hard-core Catholic writer, was invited by a fallen Irish-Catholic high society literati figure, Mary McCarthy, to a dinner party with many of New York’s high society's elite present, and during dinner, Mary asked Flannery if she really believes the Eucharist IS the very body and blood of Christ. And Flannery responded, "If it isn't, then to hell with it." No faith for us Catholics unless we believe what Jesus said without any qualification. Recall when Jesus fed the 5000, not counting the women and children. Immediately following that miracle, the entire gathering decided to carry Jesus into Jerusalem and declare him king. Think about that. Make it real to your mind. Those thousands of Jews who were ready to be slaughtered by Roman soldiers. This when Jesus announced to them that if they want to enter into his Kingdom (Heaven on Earth) they would have to consume his body and blood. This, of course, horrified them and ran away in that state of being horrified. And guess what? His disciples were horrified, too. Did Jesus at that point, in any way, offer a qualification like you and other protestants do? If Jesus didn’t offer any qualification to his immediate and most loyal disciples in their obvious stress and disbelief in what he claimed, then neither do we Catholic disciples today, and why we don’t accept any qualification from any of his disciples today. When Jesus’ disciples were shocked in disbelief, they still didn’t follow those thousands running away in horrid disbelief. They right then and there were anxiously waiting for Jesus’ clarification-qualification, like he always did when they got confused about anything he said, like when Jesus told the parable of the seeds. This eucharistic event was the ONLY time Jesus did not offer a qualification, because there was none to be had. So why, in that moment, did the disciples choose not to run away in horror as the masses did? Because they knew in the marrow of their bones, if not in thought, that this man Jesus was the long-awaited Messiah. They knew there was no other place to go than to be with him, and so they accepted the teaching absent any qualification without understanding it, deciding instead to reside in the mystery of it. And that has not changed with us Catholic disciples. So I say to my Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ, “Thank you, but No thank you” for the proffered qualifications of this mystery that simply can’t work for us. We’re sticking with what Jesus insisted on with no qualification.

[@coG25]

@Greg Koukl/STRvideos- from a textual perspective, what would you tell all those Christians in the first 1500 years of Christianity who didn't have a bible to read/learn from, also, has it ever crossed your mind about those who turned away and left Christ when He was speaking about His body/blood, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?” they said. {Gregory, stop fighting Christ, stop trying to lead but rather follow Christ.} ✟✟✟

[@Matthewpeters7]

Look, Jesus Christ has told us that He will send the Holy Spirit and the Spirit will teach us all things John 15:26 and 16:13. So if we are having this conversation then someone has not taken the time to allow the Holy Spirit to teach them. I was Catholic and I allowed the Bible to come into my life... The Holy Spirit came too and with a humble heart I quickly saw the error of being Catholic! Now I follow Christ more prefectly than when I was a Catholic... Just be humble and study the WORD!!!

[@Matthewpeters7]

The idols in the Catholic church are being worshipped by their very presence! READ THE TEN COMMANDMENTS!!!!!! EXODUS 20:1-17!!! IT is clear we are not to make them or bow down to them. THe pagans always stated that their idols were to represent something else and that the worship was not of the statue, but that is what God had a problem with!!! That was the very problem! Just having them is wrong and contrary to the will of God whom you are supposed to be worshipping! Obey God and not Man

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@2000YearsOfTradition @2000YearsOfTradition Uhhh, 2yot....have you ever been to your church before??? I have seen curtseying or bowing done by every one who was a member the few times i've gone to mass, how can you FALSELY claim it is not done?? Given all the attention you catholics give to Mary, i would say those statues and pictures are idolatrous. How can i keep talking to you when you are going to lie and ignore facts??? I bet lying is fun for you.

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@2000YearsOfTradition Don't you dare accuse me of hating the true Church! I hate heresy, pure and simple! As i said before the catholic church bears little to no resemblance to the early church. You exalt your tradition in the same way the scribes and pharisees did, you worship/exalt the mother Mary and yet push Jesus aside giving Him only an honorable mention. He said "if you continue IN MY WORD (NOT In the catholic tradition!!!!) THEN you will know the TRUTH and the truth will set you free.

[@Doyler3]

I would also add that the early Church Father (St. Ignatius, Ireneus, Martyr, Clement, Polycarp, and many others ... even St. paul in 1 Cor 11: 23-29, talks of the Body and Blood. Another request (if u haven't already), is to look at the writings of a lay Protestant Minister named Scott Haun. He was engrained in Protestantism and became a Catholic not too long ago. Someone like him may be the best source for unbiased interpretation. Although he is a Catholic now. Book= "The Lambs supper"

[@gerrym91]

Thank you Greg for doing all that you do for STR. I have to disagree with you on this. For full disclosure, I am a Catholic. The text of John 6 is totally different than the gate/vine passages. None of his followers left him over the metaphors of the gate/vine. In John 6, after introducing the idea of eating his flesh and blood, he first uses the "Amen, Amen" formula that indicates literalness in biblical interpretation. Further, he presses the objections to the literalness of the Jewish listeners by using more literal terms for eating. He starts with the term for regular human eating, then after the "Amen, Amen" he uses the term for animal eating/gnawing. Jesus chose to be emphatic about the literalness of His words about the necessity of eating his flesh and blood. No disciples of Jesus left him over other teachings/metaphors/parables (until the trial/crucifixion), only this one. The connection to the last supper is clear especially in light of 1 Corr 11:23-32 ("sinning against the body and blood of the Lord"). BTW, St. Thomas Aquinas who first wrote on transubstantiation also believed he didn't do justice to the philosophy behind it. Nevertheless, the Church has maintained Aquinas' accident/substance argument.

[@maryruffcorn1358]

Just what I was about to put forth! Thank you for doing so!

[@kraffty1]

I was born and raised Catholic, so I can sympathize with your desire to defend the doctrine of transubstantiation. However, I suggest you juxtapose Thomas Aquinas 1224/6-1274 writing with that of early church fathers. Particularly concerning John 6. Clement of Alexandria (150-225) "Elsewhere the Lord, in the Gospel according to John, brought this out by symbols, when He said: 'Eat ye my flesh, and drink my blood,' describing distinctly by metaphor the drinkable properties of faith and the promise, by means of which the Church, like a human being consisting of many members, is refreshed and grows, is welded together and compacted of both,--of faith, which is the body, and of hope, which is the soul; as also the Lord of flesh and blood. For in reality the blood of faith is hope, in which faith is held as by a vital principle."--(Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, 1:6)

[@kraffty1]

Tertullian (155-220) "He says, it is true, that 'the flesh profiteth nothing;' but then, as in the former case, the meaning must be regulated by the subject which is spoken of. Now, because they thought His discourse was harsh and intolerable, supposing that He had really and literally enjoined on them to eat his flesh, He, with the view of ordering the state of salvation as a spiritual thing, set out with the principle, 'It is the spirit that quickeneth;' and then added, 'The flesh profiteth nothing,'--meaning, of course, to the giving of life. He also goes on to explain what He would have us to understand by spirit: 'The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.' In a like sense He had previously said: 'He that heareth my words, and believeth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but shall pass from death unto life.' Constituting, therefore, His word as the life-giving principle, because that word is spirit and life, He likewise called His flesh by the same appelation; because, too, the Word had become flesh, we ought therefore to desire Him in order that we may have life, and to devour Him with the ear, and to ruminate on Him with the understanding, and to digest Him by faith. Now, just before the passage in hand, He had declared His flesh to be 'the bread which cometh down from heaven,' impressing on His hearers constantly under the figure of necessary food the memory of their forefathers, who had preferred the bread and flesh of Egypt to their divine calling."--(Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, 37)

[@kraffty1]

Augustine (354-430) was very inconsistent on the subject. However, he wrote "If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. 'Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,' says Christ, 'and drink His blood, ye have no life in you.' This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us."--(Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 3:16:24)

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

Participation in (communion with) the Body and Blood of Christ: 1 Corinthians 10:16-17,21 Sacrifice: Matthew 26:26-29 Mark 14:22-25 Luke 22:19-20 1 Corinthians 10: 16-17,21 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 Hebrews 13:10 Source of eternal life: John 6:54 True food and drink: John 6:55 Truth of the Eucharist requires faith given by the Holy Spirit in the order to be accepted: John 6:63-64

[@oneminuteartclass]

Obedience to Christ is the main thing here. Jesus said "DO this,,," He never explained the mystery, never talked about transubstantiation, consubstantiation or anything else. He NEVER said we have to understand the mechanics of what is happening. He only said "DO this (in remembrance of me.)" That is our sole duty. We are not required to explain it or to keep other Christians from sharing communion just because they have a different explanation.

[@Frank.OKeeffe]

Greg also needs to explain why the Jews were so disgusted that thousands of them left Jesus. I mean, doesn't Jesus have a moral obligation to say, 'Hey come back, I was speaking symbolically.' Greg is kind enough to admit there's a lot of textual data though. For example, 1 Corinthians 11:27 where St Paul says he who eats the flesh and drinks the blood without discerning the real presence, eats and drinks judgment upon himself.

[@Matthewpeters7]

This is why faith in Christ who is the WOrd of God will help in such matters of doctrinal clarity. Catholics of which I was born and raised and almost beacme a priest, are taught be tradition and do not understand how to even study the Bible. Catholicism is a way of life just like Buddism, Mormon, JW's, et al. The Bible will clear the fog and muddy waters on such issues as Catholic deception/traditions. It is hard to confess that you have been wrong when all your life pointed in that way...

[@goor1322]

Matthew Peters well said.

[@deezynar]

@2000YearsOfTradition Jesus did found the congregation of the saved, the Roman Catholic Church however is a different thing. The congregation of true believers is made up of all, and only, those who confess Jesus as Lord and strive to serve Him. There are a great many who fit that definition who are not members of the Roman Catholic Church. The RCC is not the means of salvation, Jesus is.

[@deezynar]

@@juanaragon806 Are you sure that you know that? For a very long time, it was conveyed that excommunication from the RCC was condemnation to hell.

[@StAnthonyPaduaRadTrad]

Catholics have been deeply socialized to believe that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ because it has been taught by the successors of the apostles for the entire history of the church. Why should a Catholic reject the entire consensus of the church for the some protestant interpretation which came into existence 500 years ago?

[@randyhelzerman]

How can we show catholics they shouldn't take John literally? How can we show creationists they shouldn't take Genesis literally? You can't, these are religious beliefs and the reason there are so many religions is that nobody has ever given a 100% satisfactory way to tell which parts of the bible to take literally and which to take symbolically.

[@purgatorean]

Granted, this video is quite old, however, the anti-Catholic arguments presented in this video are alive and well. The Biblical doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist has been the primary source of division ever since the very day that Christ preached this doctrine in the Synagogue at Capernaum, 2000 years ago. Protestants want to argue over the literal meaning of the Sacred Words in John 6, without considering the prophetic nature of those Words and how they relate to all of the Eucharistic prophecies throughout the entire Bible. For that I would highly recommend several books: The Lamb's Supper: The Mass as Heaven on Earth by Scott Hahn; Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist by Brant Pitre; and The Eucharist is Really Jesus by Joe Heschmeyer. In short it goes something like this. Adam and Eve fell from Grace by eating the fruit of a tree, as an act of disobedience, thus breaking Communion with God. That broken Communion with God had to be mended. So God had a plan. And He set this plan in motion with the ex-Communication of Adam and Eve from Paradise. From that moment and all through the Old Testament God made Covenants with His people, and each New Covenant increased in size. First was with Adam and Eve, a couple. Then with Noah and his Family. Then with Abraham and his Tribe. Then with Moses and his Nation. Then with David and his Kingdom. The History of Salvation goes from Gentile to Jew, and then to Jews and Gentiles, where there is neither Jew nor Gentile but only Christians, and that comes with Jesus Christ and His New Covenant people which is the Church. The Old Covenant people were commanded by God to keep the Passover as a PERPETUAL commemoration of how God freed them from slavery by an act of Communion. They had to slaughter an unblemished lamb and EAT the flesh of this lamb in order that their Firstborn sons would not die, but live. No meal - no life. And this event was the inauguration of their Exodus out of slavery and into freedom in the Promised Land. For forty years they journeyed through the desert being fed with the Manna from Heaven provided by God. This and the evening quail was their only food to nourish their physical bodies. It kept them alive until they entered into the Promised Land. All of this prefigures our journey in the New Covenant in the desert of life in the flesh as we journey to the New Promised Land - Heaven. What separated the Israelites from the bondage of slavery? It was the passing through the waters of the Red Sea, which saved God's people while destroying the slave masters. This prefigured the waters of Baptism in the New Covenant. Baptism is the beginning of the journey for God's people in the New Covenant, just as crossing the Red Sea was the beginning of the journey for God's people of the Old Covenant. Jesus in the Eucharist is the New Manna from Heaven that is the only food to nourish our Spiritual Bodies as we journey together to our Promised Land. No Baptism - no journey. No Baptism - no Eucharist. Jesus is the New Passover meal. He is the unblemished Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world. And He commanded that we eat His flesh and drink His blood in order to share in Eternal Life with Him. This is a PERPETUAL commemoration just as the Old Passover was. The Old Passover has become the New Passover. The Gospels tell us that Jesus is the Fruit of the Womb, that was hung on a Tree. When we eat this Fruit from the Tree of Life, which is the Bread of Life, then we enter into Communion with God once again, repairing the broken Communion of Adam and Eve. We who are the New Covenant People of God are no longer ex-Communicated as long as we eat the Lamb of God - the Fruit of the Tree - from the Altar of the Cross. By our Baptism we become the First Born of God because we enter into Christ, and therefore are adopted into the Family of God. And just as the First Born sons of the Old Covenant were saved from physical death by the Old Passover meal, now the First Born sons of the New Covenant are saved from Spiritual Death by the New Passover meal. That is how we know that the Words of Christ in John 6 are to be taken literally. The New Covenant marries the Passover meal shared in communion with the family to the Priestly sacrifices in the Temple. This is why the Veil in the Temple was torn the moment that Christ died on the Altar of the Cross. The Holy of Holies is no longer veiled from us, but is enjoined to us in the Supper of the Lamb, as Christ the Bridegroom and His Bride the Church are united, Flesh to Flesh at every Mass. Our flesh and His Flesh become One, just as a Bridegroom and Bride become one flesh on their wedding night. This is how we know that the Words of John 6 are to be taken literally. He abides in us and we abide in Him. God desires that His creation be in Communion with Him. He desires that we share in His Divine Life. That's what the Sacraments of the Church are for. There is not one single example in the Biblical New Covenant Church of a person being saved like a Protestant, that is by faith alone and without a Catholic Sacrament. I would urge you to read the entire chapter of John 6 with all of this in mind. God bless.

[@Frank.OKeeffe]

Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, 110 A.D.: Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God ... They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again.

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@2000YearsOfTradition Here is why i will not waste any more of my time arguing with you. You are dishonest and you go to great lengths to be disagreeable. But you end up looking dumb and you lose yet another argument, you're just to ignorant to know it. A bow and a curtsey are similar, in that they show respect or reverence. Look it up. Now go ahead, have the last futile word here. Put in your less than 2 cents worth and then dishonestly claim victory.

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@2000YearsOfTradition Quit LYING and putting words in my mouth 2YOT! I said i am only interested in what the bible teaches, which INCLUDES what the apostles said. You twist things to suit yourself. I will look again at the Fatima message. I agree with ANF about their other protests you mentioned. But i do NOT agree with paying such homage to the mother Mary. That is wrong. She isn't even mentioned in the epistles, that i know of and very little mention in the gospels.

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@2000YearsOfTradition My claims are true! If you don't worship Mary, then take down ALL the pictures and statues you have and QUIT curtseying to her as you enter the church. You put her before Christ! You are completely blind to your own heretical traditions! The bible doesn't "talk" about sola scriptura, it implies it with the verse i just used. And i added "not the catholic tradition" as a side remark, not as a quote from the bible, Capiche?

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@2000YearsOfTradition Won't bother explaining because you will not understand. I'm not interested in what "the church fathers" believed. Only what's found in my bible. That's plenty. You Catholics tend to exalt your tradition over the written Word. I took a look at the link you call your website on your channel and was horrified at what i found. What rank heresy!! We DON'T need Fatima and we don't need to adore Mary and always have her name on our lips!!! (cont.)

[@deezynar]

@xAlexYousifx My friend is wrong - OK, I'll be sure to tell him. Please give me some reference from the Catholic church itself to show that the Catholic church has only one set of dogmas and doctrines. Plus I'd like you to explain how the Catholic church can tolerate such a wide variety of contrary beliefs among it's laity & clergy. If something is true, especially if it's approved by the Authoritative Interpreter, then there's no room for wiggling about.

[@xAlexYousifx]

@deezynar Your friend is wrong, there is one single set of Dogmas and doctrines in the Roman catholic church, and those are universally upheld in the whole church. E.g., The U.S as a state has certain official policies, however, the citizens within that state can have different views. Likewise, people within the church may have different views on these Dogmas/Doctrines, but the Catholic Church certainly does not.

[@deezynar]

@xAlexYousifx I'm a protestant who has a Catholic friend who studied to be a priest, he's always telling me that there is not one single set of doctrines within the Roman Catholic church. He boasts that there's a variety of views on lots of different subjects. I don't see anything superior about that over Protestantism's many denominations. Most variations in doctrine come about because folks, Protestants & Catholics, so frequently misread the word. I know I have an imperfect understanding.

[@Howie47]

When one of the disciples asked Jesus to sit at his right in heaven. Jesus said: "are you able to drink of the cup I am going to drink." Jesus spoke of the suffering he would partake of in his life. When we eat and drink of the body & blood of Christ, we partake of his life. Belief in it's proper definition here means; "to drink in" To believe Jesus died and paid for our sin, that all flesh is corrupted. To partake of the suffering with Christ. Having are eyes and treasures in heaven.

[@DonusAmbrose]

@jrsbarker Actually, Pope Gelasius held to a spiritual presence in arguing against Eutyches (who believed that Christ's nature was changed into divinity similar to how the Eucharist is changed into his body): "The sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, which we receive, is a divine thing, because by it we are made partakers of the divine nature. Yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine does not cease. And assuredly the IMAGE and the SIMILITUDE of the body and blood are celebrated"

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@2000YearsOfTradition Your prayers will do no good. You are part of a cult pushing all this new age type stuff on people and calling it Christian tradition. And yet you continue to have this sanctimonious attitude. You strain a gnat and swallow a camel. Give me sola scriptura any day over the Catholic church and all it's heresy.

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@2000YearsOfTradition Your response was uncalled for, showing you misunderstood my intentions, and your self-righteous attitude is only one of the reasons why I and others search no further into Catholicism. I've met too many just like you. And how dare you drag the name of the creator into your smug comment. That is blasphemy.

[@Jugglable]

1 Cor 11:29-30 "For all who eat and drink without discerning the body eat and drink judgment against themselves. For this reason many of you are weak and ill, and some have died." Notice the use of DISCERN. To perceive. He's saying to partake of the bread and wine without recognizing the real presence is a serious offense.

[@tnyrb444b]

Wow Greg.While I love your "Stand to Reason" podcast, this is by far the weakest argument you have ever attempted to put forward. Catholics are "unthinkingly socialized" to believe in the presence in the Eucharist. I would love to use some of your gracious tactics to refute your "argument", however I see countless others have already done so.

[@sunshade0]

So long as they do it because he asked us to, then your taking part in it. Seeing the literal or symbol isn't the thing he asked, but he said do this in remeberance of me. We should do it out of love of him, not for the view of the man made bread or wine, but for the love of The LORD.

[@dominguessdude]

The Catholic church indeed does not teach or promote any form of worship to the saints nor Mary etc... but prayer requests. Problem is that an unfair number of devout Catholics cross the line and actually perform other exercises that may as well be identified as idol worship.

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@2000YearsOfTradition I would have to say that the Catholic church of today bears little to no resemblance to the church Christ founded. Don't be insulted. Protestant churches are no better.

[@vtorrieri]

Dear Mr. Koukl, a great respect for your work. However, you are really wrong on this. I would suggest you watch Father Barron and his arguments on the eucharist. God Bless.

[@David578593]

Well, God is the One who changes the heart. We must pray that God would change the hearts of Roman Catholics. He really does, He did it it for my entire family and I. =)

[@wood9670]

"For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (c. A.D. 110-165).

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 If you just hurl false claims & can't provide me any proof, then it's not me who ends up looking dumb ;) I didn't realize you considered this contest for the win, but in that case .. Dun, dun, dun, another heretical protest-ant bites the dust .. Dun, dun, dun, another heretical protest-ant bites the dust .. And another one down, and another one down, Another heretical protest-ant bites the dust! :)

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 If you just hurl false claims & can't provide me any proof, then it's not me who ends up looking dumb ;) I didn't realize you considered this contest for the win, but in that case .. Dun, dun, dun, another heretical protest-ant bites the dust .. Dun, dun, dun, another heretical protest-ant bites the dust .. And another one down, and another one down, Another heretical protest-ant bites the dust! :) I'm still praying for you though. +++

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 I haven't been dishonest about one thing. Catholics don't curtsey, but we do bow in reverence. You still haven't been able to back your false claims you hurled against the True Faith. Where's your proof the Church exalts Tradition over the Bible ? Where's your proof sola scriptura is implied in the Bible, what Book & Verse is it ?? What is your proof that icons & statues & veneration to Mary is idolatrous ??? Don't run away, back up what you say ..

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 I've never seen anyone curtsey in a Catholic Church before & I seriously doubt you have either. I have seen people show reverence by a bow or on bended knee though. God is Truly present in all Catholic Churches world wide. How does having statues or pictures/icons become idolatrous ?? Still waiting for your response to back up your claim that sola scriptura is implied in the Bible. What Book & verse in the Bible is it ?? It's your claim, now back it up.

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 Look, I'm not lying. You said you weren't interested in learning from the earliest of Christians, the Church Fathers. You say you're only interested in what the Bible teaches, but how can you not be interested in the Church that complied the Bible that you're reading from. That is illogical. The Catholic Church didn't come from the Bible. The Bible did come from the Catholic Church though. I'm still waiting for the Book & verse in the Bible you say implies "sola scriptura"..

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 I've never seen anyone ever curtsey in Church, how bizarre of a claim! Having icons/statues certainly doesn't mean they are being worshiped, another bizarre & false claim! The Church does not put Mary or anyone before Christ! These claims are completely false! The burden of proof is on you, show me one Church document or anything stated by the Church to back up your ridiculously false claims. What book & verse implies sola scriptura ?? This is gonna be fun :)

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 .. The Church does not exalt Tradition over the Bible. The Church does not worship the Blessed Virgin Mary or any saints & push Jesus aside. Your claims are false. Worship & adoration is for God only. Where in the Bible does it say "not the Catholic Tradition" ??? Where in the Bible does it talk about sola scriptura ??? Remember the Catholic Church, the True Church established by Our Lord Jesus Christ complied the Bible you're reading from. God bless +++

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 .. So you're not interested in what the Apostles believed, who were taught by Christ ?? You're not interested in those who were taught by the Apostles and so on. This is called Apostolic succession. And you claim to be a Christian but not interested??? ANF is about the message of Fatima. The call to conversion to Christ, how the world needs to change & reconcile with God. ANF also protest blasphemy, abortions, so-called same sex unions, etc. God bless+++

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 .. Oh how your misguided hatred for the Church is manifested. Strange how you say the Catholic Church is a cult or pushing new age agenda. Both are completely false. The Catholic Church is 100% opposed to the new age movement. There is no heresy in the Catholic Church. But it is heresy to deny the Church Christ established and the Sacraments He gave us. Where in the Bible is sola scriptura mentioned ?? By the way, the Catholic Church complied the Bible. +++

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967.. Uncalled for?? Self-righteous??? I just responded to your comment you left for me. What is self-righteous or uncalled for in what I said? I just told you to look up what the earliest of Christians believed, those are called the Church fathers. Blasphemy???? Are you kidding???? I did no such thing!! Look up what the word means before you accuse others of doing it. Like I said last time, I'll be praying for you. God bless +++

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

Compared and contrasted with pagan and Jewish sacrifices: 1 Corinthians 10:18-21 Hebrews 13:10 Danger of unworthy reception of the Eucharist: 1 Corinthians 11:27-30 Death of the Lord is proclaimed by the Eucharist: 1 Corinthians 11:26 Flesh and Blood of Jesus: John 6:51; 53-56 Judas' rejection of the Eucharist: John 6:64 Necessity of eating the Flesh of Jesus and drinking his Blood: John 6:51; 53-58

[@wood9670]

"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110).

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@sunshinegirl1967 .. I would have to say that you have little to no understanding and knowledge of the the Catholic Church, which Christ founded. Don't be insulted. Do some relatively easy research on the early Church fathers and what they believed. I'll be praying for you. God bless +++

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

Eucharist, Sacrament of the Holy Communion Body and Blood of Christ: Matthew 26:26-29 Mark 14:22-25 Luke 22:19-20 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 Bread from Heaven: John 6:33, 50-51 Bread of Life: John 6:35, 38, 51

[@wood9670]

I'll stop spamming but the crux of the issue is that you cannot show me any orthodox Christian pre-reformation that holds to the view of communion as you do and this is why Catholics don't take your arguments seriously.

[@Howie47]

@Howie47 The communion ceremony is only done to remember the life of Christ. "do this in remembrance of me".

[@Matthewpeters7]

Catholics are wonderful people and love God very much...most of them, but protestant Christians are supposed to be followers of Christ throught the Holy SPirit and The word of God helps them to stay on the right tract. Being raised a Catholic and then experiencing the WOrd of God and the Holy Spirit gave me a special understanding of where these people are where they are at in their spiritual walk. It is harder to find Christ through pagan errors and superstition, but some do it and are blesse

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH FOUNDED BY CHRIST HIMSELF IN 33 AD. your Heretical protestant sect founded, by some guy, no earlier than the 16th century.

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@deezynar ... The Catholic Church is the Original Church founded by Christ in 33 AD. Only Heretical protest-ant sects are denominations.

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@deezynar ... Salvation comes through Christ and the Church He established, The Catholic Church.

[@YouAreIsrael]

Why disparage the Catholics while you keep their day? Seems inconsistent.

[@92pullman50]

So there are 2 groups Jesus ends up with in John 6. Those that accept what Jesus is saying as literal however hard it may be and those that do NOT accept what he is saying as literal and walk away from Jesus. My question is.....Which group are you in? I know which group I belong in.

[@jwlthe4th]

I wonder if anyone has ever checked a wafer for DNA?

[@deezynar]

@2000YearsOfTradition Sure.

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@SheIsCatholic Amen ... Well said!

[@2000YearsOfTradition]

@LatinPrayers Amen .. the Truth!

[@deezynar]

@xAlexYousifx Thanks for the reference. I told my friend, after he stopped laughing, he said that's just the cover story. He sat through many lectures by priests, bishops and monks who gave views that were so varied from each other he was amazed they were all in the same denomination. If this amount of diversity exists, it's because the hierarchy isn't using it's authority to reign things in. It's always been like that in your church. That's 1 reason they kept bibles from the laity.

[@Yesica1993]

I have found Catholics to be the some of the most difficult people to speak to about some of their doctrines. The most bizarre thing is the attachment to Mary. I have had people end their friendship with me because I have made the case that the attention given to Mary is idolatrous.

[@wood9670]

@SuperDjhart, the point was that the Catholic position on the Eucharist is the historical view. I was trying to demonstrate that Koukl was wrong in his critique. In any case, I am no longer Christian and thus these arguments and debates no longer interest me.

[@sunshinegirl1967]

@Yesica1993 I've found the same thing to be true. Although there are a few Catholics that used to be Protestants who understand our reservations. But i still don't buy catholicism.