Eccles Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 The bible tells those who believe it that Jesus at the Last Supper took bread blessed it, broke it and told his Apostles to eat this for "this is my body" He then took wine, blessed it and told them to drink it "This is my blood" etc. This was written first about 40 years after Jesus' death and not by eyewitnesses. The truth of the matter is that Jesus, as a Jew would not say such a thing. It is strictly against the kosher laws. The flesh of humans is forbidden as is blood. As the Last Supper was a normal evening meal (it was on the Wednesday night, not the Thursday night which is the start of Passover). The usual proceedure for Jews at the evening meal is to drink the wine first, the consume the bread, then drink more wine. The "Holy" Roman Catholic Church got it wrong!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbobrob Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 There were many cannibals from the South Pacific who were disappointed that it was not the actual flesh and blood of a god. They thought they had found a really like minded tribe, but soon discovered it full of empty promises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted August 11, 2007 Share Posted August 11, 2007 Fuck the RCC! Them sonuvabitches used to kill anyone who disagreed that their bread and wine was actually flesh and blood. Sick fuckers anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LithaB Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 As a former Catholic, I must say this is the belief that most embarasses me. Actually my faith "broke" in an "Adoration Chapel" when I suddenly saw with great clarity that I was praying to a piece of flatbread and actually expecting help! I still think a starburst Monstronce(the glittering holder for the Host) is a beautiful piece of art though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white_raven23 Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 http://www.starlarvae.org/SL_graphics/monstrance_2.gif Pretty extravagant and expensive way to dress up a cracker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 Fuck the RCC! Them sonuvabitches used to kill anyone who disagreed that their bread and wine was actually flesh and blood. And were it not for international law, they'd do it again, I'd wager :angry: It's an absurd idea, that a cracker and some booze is magically transformed into the flesh and blood of a man-god. And the RCC takes this in the most literal sense; I recall hearing the explanations that no, the cracker and booze doesn't just symbolize Jesus nor is Jesus "contaminating" them like a rod of plutonium would contaminate them with radiation, but the crackers and booze are Jesus' flesh and blood. They look like crackers and booze, they smell like crackers and booze, they taste like crackers and booze, but they're NOT crackers and booze - they're really Jesus, come magically back to earth. Oh-fucking-kay Needless to say, it was a pleasure to finally throw Xianity out the door and relieve myself of impossible burdens like this one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 It doesn't seem to bother the church that this flesh and blood of Jesus you chew and swallow must also be digested with stomach acids and converted into waste matter that passes through your large intestine and out of your body to the ground. Just a thought to ponder next time you eat Jesus. I think I would actually have more respect for the church if the parishioners started eating the priests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piprus Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 It doesn't seem to bother the church that this flesh and blood of Jesus you chew and swallow must also be digested with stomach acids and converted into waste matter that passes through your large intestine and out of your body to the ground. Just a thought to ponder next time you eat Jesus. I think I would actually have more respect for the church if the parishioners started eating the priests. And that's food for thought....Yikes!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gooneybird Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 It's all just too hard to swallow. Even if it is wafer thin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrisonjj Posted August 19, 2007 Share Posted August 19, 2007 It's all just too hard to swallow. Even if it is wafer thin. I'd rather have a cheeseburger on good friday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie Posted August 19, 2007 Share Posted August 19, 2007 It's all just too hard to swallow. Even if it is wafer thin. I'd rather have a cheeseburger on good friday! Boy, am I looking forward to Good Friday. I may have to abandon my vegetarianism for the day just to piss off the Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LithaB Posted August 19, 2007 Share Posted August 19, 2007 It doesn't seem to bother the church that this flesh and blood of Jesus you chew and swallow must also be digested with stomach acids and converted into waste matter that passes through your large intestine and out of your body to the ground. Just a thought to ponder next time you eat Jesus. I think I would actually have more respect for the church if the parishioners started eating the priests. And that's food for thought....Yikes!!! The church has that covered actually. The "real presence" only lasts as long as the bread and wine remain intact. Once the digestive process breaks down these substances they are no longer the body and blood of Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted August 19, 2007 Share Posted August 19, 2007 It doesn't seem to bother the church that this flesh and blood of Jesus you chew and swallow must also be digested with stomach acids and converted into waste matter that passes through your large intestine and out of your body to the ground. Just a thought to ponder next time you eat Jesus. I think I would actually have more respect for the church if the parishioners started eating the priests. And that's food for thought....Yikes!!! The church has that covered actually. The "real presence" only lasts as long as the bread and wine remain intact. Once the digestive process breaks down these substances they are no longer the body and blood of Christ. They saw that one coming. It's quite magical how they know at what point these things happen. Still, they haven't gotten away from the whole canabilism of it. "The missionary is not longer a human after we chew and swallow the flesh of his arms and legs." But he was a human when you put him in your mouth, for god's sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Posted August 19, 2007 Share Posted August 19, 2007 The church has that covered actually. The "real presence" only lasts as long as the bread and wine remain intact. Once the digestive process breaks down these substances they are no longer the body and blood of Christ. My Father once told me that RC clergymen visiting the sick used to carry small ornate metal cases with them, in which vomited consecrated bread or crakers could be burnt. The priest would then consume the ashes. There was a time limitation between consumption and regurgitation, if the recipient kept it down long enough - this procedure did not need to be completed. I do not know if this is true of if it was protestant anti catholic propaganda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirangel Posted September 4, 2007 Share Posted September 4, 2007 As a former Catholic, I must say this is the belief that most embarasses me. Actually my faith "broke" in an "Adoration Chapel" when I suddenly saw with great clarity that I was praying to a piece of flatbread and actually expecting help! I still think a starburst Monstronce(the glittering holder for the Host) is a beautiful piece of art though. When I was a young Catholic I used to wonder who would have to consume it if someone choked on it and spit it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 As a former Catholic, I must say I still find Catholicism's take on this much better than that of Protestants. There's an awful lot of anti-Catholic propaganda spread amongst Protestants...and most of it is believed. The idea that the Church got what the Bible said about the Eucharist wrong is just one area they use to hate Catholics. Then again, my deep-seated loathing and utter disgust at all things in any way connected to Protestantism may make me a bit biased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 I was unaware that Paul thought the meal was quite magical and dangerous at that but while poking through his letters tonight I found this: 1 Corinthians 11 27 If, then, anyone takes the bread or the cup of the Lord in the wrong spirit, he will be responsible for the body and blood of the Lord. 28 But let no man take of the bread and the cup without testing himself. 29 For a man puts himself in danger, if he takes part in the holy meal without being conscious that it is the Lord's body. 30 For this cause a number of you are feeble and ill, and a number are dead. 31 But if we were true judges of ourselves, punishment would not come on us. 32 But if punishment does come, it is sent by the Lord, so that we may be safe when the world is judged. He even claims that is why people at their church were sick or even dead. Egads! Even worse it is their own god that is killing them off for the safety of the rest of the others. I guess their god wants to weed out those who don't think wine and bread aren't really something what Paul claims they are. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1oddmanout Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Ha ha ha; I remember a guy in prison with me who was the RCCs inmate helper, and he had to keep an already-consecrated host in his cell, and truly beleived that he had the Body of Christ physically in his cell! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 he had the Body of Christ physically in his cell! But isn't that the best place for this sort of thing? One down... mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest skeptic101 Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 The bible tells those who believe it that Jesus at the Last Supper took bread blessed it, broke it and told his Apostles to eat this for "this is my body" He then took wine, blessed it and told them to drink it "This is my blood" etc. This was written first about 40 years after Jesus' death and not by eyewitnesses. The truth of the matter is that Jesus, as a Jew would not say such a thing. It is strictly against the kosher laws. The flesh of humans is forbidden as is blood. As the Last Supper was a normal evening meal (it was on the Wednesday night, not the Thursday night which is the start of Passover). The usual proceedure for Jews at the evening meal is to drink the wine first, the consume the bread, then drink more wine. The "Holy" Roman Catholic Church got it wrong!!! Only the Catholic Church believes it that the bread and wine are the actual body and blood of christ. And Jesus said that the wine was his blood after they had already drank it so that that the disciples wouldn't freak out. And atleast one account was written by an eyewitness: Mark. Most scholars believe that the passover was actually held in the house of Mark's mother. They were well off and jesus wanted to go somewhere discrete to hold the passover so he could be alone with his friends. Mark's mother was healed by christ (or one of his disciples, little fuzzy on that one part) so she would have been glad to offer up her house to them. And the "usual procedures" were actually this: Friends would gather around and ceremonially wash their hand. Then the host would go through and explain what each item on the table meatn, everything had a very specific place and meaning on the table, this would usually take about an hour or two together. Then, normally the host but in this case the believed messiah, would break the bread into three pieces (representing Jacob, Issac, and Abraham) and say a blessing. However, this is where jesus changed things and broke it into tow pieces saying it represented his body being broken, aka his death. Next was the wine. Their were four cups representing the four-fold promise god made to David; I believe the promises were protection, freedom, forgiveness, and a messiah for salvation. However, jesus did not drink out of the fourth cup because, according to him, he would drink it with them when they joined him in the kingdom. After everyone else had drank form the cups he told them that the wine was his blood. I imagine some of the began chocking seeing as in jewish culture blood was/is considered extremely dirty/unclean. And the last supper was anything but a normal evening meal. It was passover. The population grew to millions in Jerusalem during that week. The meal itself took between 5-6hours because everything was done ceremoniously and precisely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white_raven23 Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 And you resurrected this thread to describe a consumption ritual....why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thackerie Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 ... And atleast one account was written by an eyewitness: Mark. Most scholars believe that the passover was actually held in the house of Mark's mother. ... Could you point out who these scholars are? Also, where did you get that part about Mark being an eyewitness to the Last Supper. You do know that no one really knows who wrote the gospels and that the names were assigned by the early church fathers, right? Even the first to attribute that particular gospel to someone named Mark didn't claim Mark ever met Jesus, much less ate with him. The following is from wikipedia: The gospel itself is anonymous, but as early as Papias in the early 2nd century, a text was attributed to Mark, a disciple of Peter, who is said to have recorded the Apostle's discourses. Papias' authority in this was John the Presbyter. While the text of Papias is no longer extant, it was quoted by Eusebius of Caesarea: This, too, the presbyter used to say. ‘Mark, who had been Peter's interpreter, wrote down carefully, but not in order, all that he remembered of the Lord’s sayings and doings. For he had not heard the Lord or been one of his followers, but later, as I said, one of Peter’s. Peter used to adapt his teachings to the occasion, without making a systematic arrangement of the Lord’s sayings, so that Mark was quite justified in writing down some of the things as he remembered them. For he had one purpose only – to leave out nothing that he had heard, and to make no misstatement about it. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWIM Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 And you resurrected this thread to describe a consumption ritual....why? Why.. why... it's a miracle! The dead are raised! (dead threads that is) lol Lucky charms stole their logo though "There magically delicious!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aqua Kitty Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 My Father once told me that RC clergymen visiting the sick used to carry small ornate metal cases with them, in which vomited consecrated bread or crakers could be burnt. The priest would then consume the ashes. There was a time limitation between consumption and regurgitation, if the recipient kept it down long enough - this procedure did not need to be completed. I do not know if this is true of if it was protestant anti catholic propaganda. I've never heard of this, but it doesn't seem that far fetched to me. So I googled "sick vomited hosts catholic" and came up with this little gem: The Eucharistic Miracle of Amsterdam The Eucharistic Miracle of Amsterdam took place on March 15, 1345, exactly six hundred years before the first apparition of the Lady of All Nations. It happened in a house on Kalver Street. As the man who lived there lay in bed, sick and dying, a priest came to administer Last Rites. After Confession the sick man received Holy Communion, but soon afterward he vomited. The woman caring for him swept it up, including the vomited Host, and threw it into the fire in the hearth. The next morning, however, after stirring the coals to rekindle the fire, she noticed the Host floating above the flames, still intact. She reverently placed the Blessed Sacrament in a clean linen cloth and put it in a linen chest. She sent for a priest, who silently brought the Host to St. Nicholas Church, now called ‘The Old Church’. To everyone’s surprise, however, the next morning the Host was again found in the linen chest. The priest came for a second time, taking the Host back to St. Nicholas’s, yet the following day the Host was again in the chest. These unusual events made the priest realize that God did not want the miracle of the Host to be kept secret. After discussing the matter with his superiors, he had the Eucharistic Body of the Lord brought back along the same route from the house to the parish church, but this time in solemn procession with the clergy and faithful. Anyway, I do know that when the priests (or whoever) rinse out the cups that held the consecrated wine, the waste water & wine does not go down the drain and into the sewer. Instead it goes out a special pipe that goes outdoors and flows onto the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Surely, if the doctrine of Transubstantiation is true, the patient must vomit gobbets of flesh and blood.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts