The Christian Eucharist is a Ritual Cannibalism

[bhaktajan]

obviously from his brother Abel.......Cain offered some of the fruits of the soil, Abel offered the first born of his flock......Gen 4:3......

Thank you for correcting me.

I may have made more mistakes:

Did Abel eat the Sheep? If so, my question stands "where did Abel get the idea to eat flesh?"

But, Genesis states Herbs & Seeds etc "Will be food for you" ---is this rule broken if Abel ate sheep?

Did Cain, have an inside reason to knock off his bro.

Abel had broken that Genesis rule?

If eaten, then it was the cause of Abel's demise. It was bad-karma for Abel?

These and other questions TBA

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Thank you for correcting me.

I may have made more mistakes:

Did Abel eat the Sheep? If so, my question stands "where did Abel get the idea to eat flesh?"

But, Genesis states Herbs & Seeds etc "Will be food for you" ---is this rule broken if Abel ate sheep?

Did Cain, have an inside reason to knock off his bro.

Abel had broken that Genesis rule?

If eaten, then it was the cause of Abel's demise. It was bad-karma for Abel?

These and other questions TBA

if eating meat was against God's rules I expect it wouldn't have been Cain that pissed him off.......

 

[MAGA MAN]

In Catholicism, the bread is literally the body of Christ. Most Catholics don't even know this, but according to the Catholic church, the bread transforms into Jesus' body during the ritual.
So yup, cannibalism.

Nope. It's a piece of bread. Perhaps you should read up a bit instead of continuing to make a fool of yourself.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm

 

[StoneByStone]

Nope. It's a piece of bread. Perhaps you should read up a bit instead of continuing to make a fool of yourself.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm

Keep your words sweet, you might have to eat them.

From your own link: "1413 By the consecration the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is brought about. Under the consecrated species of bread and wine Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: his Body and his Blood, with his soul and his divinity (cf. Council of Trent: DS 1640; 1651)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

 

[MAGA MAN]

Keep your words sweet, you might have to eat them.

From your own link: "1413 By the consecration the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is brought about. Under the consecrated species of bread and wine Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: his Body and his Blood, with his soul and his divinity (cf. Council of Trent: DS 1640; 1651)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

I suggest that you read the full article in context and with an open mind, if that is possible.

 

[Ralph]

It is quite probable that Jesus Christ was eaten by his followers
As we can infer from the biblical texts, the tomb where Christ’s body was stored was not guarded. True, the Gospel according to Matthew claims that in order to prevent the corpse of Jesus Christ from being stolen from the tomb, the next day after the crucifixion chief Jewish priests and Pharisees assembled in front of Pilate and asked him to post a guard to secure the tomb, and when Pilot told them, – ‘You have a guard…’ – they put (their?) guards at the tomb and sealed the stone. (Matthew, 27, 62-66)

This episode does not seem to be a testimony by some Christ’s contemporary, but it rather looks as a fake, which was grafted into the Gospel by a person who was not familiar with the Jewish religion and culture, because the events took place during the Sabbath, and any work (sealing the tomb and possibly posting the guard or even standing on guard) was then a serious crime against the Jewish religion.

Even the mother of the prophet and his (apparently) girlfriend or wife Mary Magdalene did not dare even to make preparations for the pending burial ceremony – there is little doubt that that nobody guarded the tomb until the Saturday sunset.

Even on the Sunday morning when the two Maries came to the tomb, they found only one man, who tried to convince them that Jesus Christ had resurrected (or two men according to Luke and John). So, most probably none of Christ’s enemies had guarded the tomb at all.

The owner of the tomb, Joseph from Arimathea, apparently was Christ’s disciple, so in fact the followers of the Christian prophet could have done with his corpse whatever they wanted, and they could have eaten the body as well.

If the body of Jesus Christ had actually disappeared during the cannibalistic party of his disciples, it is quite natural that they preserved their secret. The disclosure of such secret would not only have discredited the then still emerging Christianity, but also Jews, who did not tolerate cannibalism, would have executed all the participants of the last feast. Anyway, even if somebody of the initiated had blurted it out, nobody believed him.


Having assumed that Jesus Christ was eaten, many myths and rites of Christianity do not seem strange and mysterious any more
As it was mentioned above, the scene of the ‘Last supper’ acquires sense. Its purpose is to persuade Christ’s disciples that they will have to eat the flesh of their teacher and to drink his blood and to convince the ‘apostles’ that by doing this they will overtake Christ’s divinity.

Then, there appears to be much more sense in many other aspects of Christianity, including the myth about the resurrection of Jesus Christ itself.


http://www.counter-propaganda.com/?article=en_Could_Jesus_Christ_have_been_eaten?

Yeah....real objective scientific facts in evidence. PROBABLE.....INFER......DOES NOT "SEEM"...….RATHER "LOOKS"......LITTLE DOUBT.....MOST PROBABLY....my personal favorite? here goes.....so IN FACT the followers COULD HAVE. Yeah....in fact they could have? LMAO

Lets us continue along this objective road of evidences Would have executed......ANYWAY...really? IF...really? Assumed Jesus was eaten? really? and then you attempt to chastise others for promoting what you call MYTHS? really? Appears to be? really?


Shall we count the number of what ifs, could haves..etc.? Ball park...I counted at least a bakers dozen SUBJECTIVE attempts to present BULLSHIT as facts.

Simple show the book, chapter and verse where any of this supposed evidence rests in specific language as you used. Proceed. AS ALWAYS.....THE PROBLEM WITH PROAGANDA....THERE IS NO METHOD OF DOCUMENTING IT LIKE FACTS CAN BE DOCUMENTED. Its all based upon word of mouth BULLSHIT in the hope that others are gullible enough not to investigate.

 

[StoneByStone]

I suggest that you read the full article in context and with an open mind, if that is possible.

Sounds like you're mad that I proved to you how stupid your beliefs are.

"In Roman Catholicism and some other Christian churches, the doctrine, which was first called transubstantiation in the 12th century, aims at safeguarding the literal truth of Christ’s presence while emphasizing the fact that there is no change in the empirical appearances of the bread and wine."

https://www.britannica.com/topic/transubstantiation

 

[MAGA MAN]

Sounds like you're mad that I proved to you how stupid your beliefs are.

"In Roman Catholicism and some other Christian churches, the doctrine, which was first called transubstantiation in the 12th century, aims at safeguarding the literal truth of Christ’s presence while emphasizing the fact that there is no change in the empirical appearances of the bread and wine."

https://www.britannica.com/topic/transubstantiation

That's simple projection on your part. It's you libs that are emotional creatures, and I ain't no lib.

I'll take the Vatican's interpretation of Catholicism over an encyclopedia, thanks.

 

[Iolo/Penderyn]

Traditional Christianity is a highly symbolic business - the font near the door, because you enter the Church at baptism and so on. The Last supper consisted of bread and wine, standard food, and Jesus sacrificed his body and blood for the poor and oppressed, normal people: thus the two were identified, so that you entered into a unity with Him by the normal business of eating and drinking with the connection in memory. It is the way people's minds worked back then. I was just reading Proust where he says 'the Celts' believed the spirits of the dead were entrapped in objects until someone who knew them walked by and they were liberated - it 'explains' the way objects can suddenly remind us vividly of the dead I suppose. I think it is anthropologically interesting that early socialism expressed itself in this way before the Roman imperialist establishment moved in to make it a 'religion', and I think it is more usefully looked at this way rather than reliving distant theological fantasies.

 

[Guno צְבִי]

From now on, Church members will remember Jesus every single time they sit down and sink their teeth into a juicy hamburger! Landover Baptist Church enjoyed the grand opening of The Body of Christ Burger Barn this past weekend. The Barn serves only 100% beef ground daily, store-baked mouth-watering buns (which are also used for communion), an enormous amount of fresh fixings and an unlimited supply of fun!

Body of Christ Burger Barns were started in 1995 by TBN Ministries and have finally found their way to Freehold, Iowa. Delicious grape juice accompanies communion which is served right over the counter. What a great way to get close to Jesus and enjoy fellowship, family and fun with every meal!

 

[bhaktajan]

if eating meat was against God's rules I expect it wouldn't have been Cain that pissed him off.......

The guy that raise the sheep gets killed by his brother.

God gave Abel a benediction?

Cain & Seth went on to populate the world.

[I presume the sheep was for meat or else it was for wool?]

I am referring to the rule given to NOT eat flesh ---and that IMO leads to trickle-down violence ultimately.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I am referring to the rule given to NOT eat flesh .

not familiar with that rule....when did you write it?......

 

[Ralph]

not familiar with that rule....when did you write it?......

There is no such restriction on Christians.....as the Christ sanctified all foods with simple prayer. The ignorant continue to attempt to present LAWS that were dedicated only for JEWS.

The only restrictions upon eating are as follows, "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us (the Apostles) to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary thing; that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood (the physical intake of physical blood that has not been processed through cooking etc.,..i.e,, the ingestion of raw blood), from things strangled, from sexual immorality. If you keep yourself from these, you will do well. Farewell." -- Acts 15:28-29.

The New Testament clearly states that all meats are good for human consumption when properly processed. "And then He (the Christ) said to them, "Are you lacking understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach and is eliminated?" (He (the Christ declared all things clean.) -- Mark 7:18-19

"For every Creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer." -- 1 Tim. 4:4-5

In addressing Gentiles (converts of Christianity) Paul told them, "So let no man judge you in food or drink, or regarding a festival or new moon Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance of is of Christ." -- Col. 2:16-17. And he (the Apostle Paul) states the reason.....The Old Testament had come to an end. "And you (gentiles) being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh (the OLD TESTAMENT LAWS), He (the Christ) has made alive together with Him, having forgave you of all trespasses, which was contrary to us(Hebrews), having wiped out the handwriting of requirements (the Old Law requirements such as forbidding the eating of meat.....circumcision, etc.) that was against us. AND HE HAS TAKEN IT (the LAW) OUT OF THE WAY, HAVING NAILED IT TO HIS CROSS." -- Col. 2:13-14.

The scriptures clearly detail the fact that the LAW OF MOSES (the Torah)...the OLD LAW and its requirements were unique to the nation of Biblical Israel and did not include any other nations on earth. (Deut: 5:2). The law did not apply to the fathers of Israel (the generations that came before that day)…..nor did it apply to any other nation on earth. In the Book of Jer. Chapter 31:31-34 we find that a NEW COVENANT was to come that was not like the old law and unique to Israel....a covenant that would not be written on stone tablets but on the hearts of those who would follow.

 

[Guno צְבִי]

Hey little johnny and Suzy , eat the man god jesus



what a bunch of savages

 

[Guno צְבִי]

eating man gods is paganism carried over into Christianity, not derived from Judaism

 

[Minister of Truth]

Hey little johnny and Suzy , eat the man god jesus



what a bunch of savages

Or you could have him crucified. That's the exact opposite of savagery.

 

[Ralph]

Or you could have him crucified. That's the exact opposite of savagery.

Yeah.....the tolerant left with its non fascist bigoted attack against Christians. That's the opposite of LIBERALISM...no?

Are liberals really liberal? You are the quint essential example. You act like you are a liberal/libertarian..progressive, but...…..you are anything but accepting of others liberty. To the majority of liberals all one needs to be wise, intelligent and compassionate ….sensitive....is to claim LIBERALISM as an ideology. But in the real world, many of the good things that are exampled in anyone come from their actions...not their words or the ideology they hold.

To the young snowflakes this is an obvious appeal...they are inundated with left wing propaganda on a daily basis...they wake up to left wing music playing on a radio, they watch cartoons before school...all produced with left leaning writers etc. they go to school and are indoctrinated by liberal teachers, they are instructed in group thinking instead of individual reasoning based upon logic....

Reality again: You can be a misogynist, but get to call yourself a supporter of feminism because you label yourself a liberal (not so....just ask any liberal about Sarah Palin if you want to see their nostrils flare up with liberal tolerance based upon feminism) You can hate blacks (closeted of course...white guilt prevents you from expressing your true feelings...and feelings are everything to a liberal...so you must hide them in order to seek the accolade of your fellow snowflakes)….but ACCUSE OTHERS OF RACISM, have a subpar IQ and consider yourself to be an intellectual...BECAUSE you identify as a LIBERAL.

You can give nothing to charity....but demand everyone else GIVE to the POOR, if they don't they are bigoted racists.....but you still consider yourself compassionate because...YOU ARE A LIBERAL.

Liberalism is a shortcut to self professed VIRTUE....I can see the appeal for young people...its like a get out jail free card. Its much like those that profess to be Christian or religious...they define this by declaring they give to the church...but never attend, give any personal time, ….they have a free pass into heaven, they purchased their way in. You purchase your virtue by claiming to be a tolerant, compassionate, giving, caring, feminist supporting, minority supporting, open minded.....LIBERAL.

But...look through all the archives on this site alone. What is the percentage of any liberal on this site starting a thread that deals in compassion, tolerance, caring, supporting, open mindedness, that does not accuse others of being a racist, bigoted, misogynist, homophobic, STUPID, red necked cracker...OR CANIABALISM....all to TROLL in expectation of inducing anger. I do not "feel" anger.....only sympathy...for your parents.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Yeah.....the tolerant left with its non fascist bigoted attack against Christians. That's the opposite of LIBERALISM...no?

Are liberals really liberal? You are the quint essential example. You act like you are a liberal but...…..you are anything but accepting of others liberty. To the majority of liberals all one needs to be wise, intelligent and compassionate ….sensitive....is to claim LIBERALISM as an ideology. But in the real world, many of the good things that are exampled in anyone come from their actions...not their words or the ideology they hold.

You're right, leftists are illiberal. Progressives don't advocate immediate overthrow of liberalism, the way that socialists and Marxists do, but, they do reject it, and seek to replace it with a revised system.

I'm glad that you recognize my commitment to Western liberalism.

In case you were confused, I was responding to Goony's dumbfuckery with sarcasm. I don't actually blame the Jews for the crucifixion, nor do I consider the practice to have been civilized.

 

[Ralph]

You're right, leftists are illiberal. Progressives don't advocate immediate overthrow of liberalism, the way that socialists and Marxists do, but, they do reject it, and seek to replace it with a revised system.

I'm glad that you recognize my commitment to Western liberalism.

In case you were confused, I was responding to Goony's dumbfuckery with sarcasm. I don't actually blame the Jews for the crucifixion, nor do I consider the practice to have been civilized.

Western liberalism.....what a new buzz word for SOCIAL FASCISM? As I said, you are the quint essential example. Now you are doubling down and pretending that Western Liberalism is not reallllllllllllllllllly liberalism, it allows me to be all things you pointed out and still FEEL Good about not accepting the liberty of others, because well.....I am a NEO LIBERAL, I was really only being sarcastic...its not trolling really its not? LMAO

 

[Minister of Truth]

Western liberalism.....what a new buzz word for SOCIAL FASCISM? As I said, you are the quint essential example. Now you are doubling down and pretending that Western Liberalism is not reallllllllllllllllllly liberalism, it allows me to be all things you pointed out and still FEEL Good about not accepting the liberty of others, because well.....I am a NEO LIBERAL, I was really only being sarcastic...its not trolling really its not? LMAO

Are you retarded, or do you really not know what Western liberalism is?

Does Locke/Hooker, natural law, Whig Party, English/US Constitution, Adam Smith/Thomas Paine/John Adams/Thomas Jefferson, American Declaration of Independence, ring any bells?