E

@MMash3204 @thattradgal If your issue is with that, talk to the church elders 🤷‍♂️ If it doesn't matter to you, that's fine. But don't pretend you know more than the church elders.

@ebound @thattradgal He is clearly speaking metaphorically in my opinion and idk how Catholics got it so wrong

He didn’t say; “This represents my body.” He didn’t say; “This symbolizes my body.” He said; “This IS my body.”

@CalHunter2 @SambucusNemesis @thattradgal Enlighten me

@ebound @SambucusNemesis @thattradgal that’s why catholics are lost, you tend to quote bible verses without context. Read the entire chapter 6 for better understanding.

@trenton_vet @skyfoil_exe 2 Maccabees 12, 2 Timothy 1, Matthew 12, 1 Corinthians 3 for praying for the dead. Matthew 19, 1 Timothy 2, Matthew 2 for children. Remember we are bound by the sacraments, not God.

@ebound @skyfoil_exe Do you know where I can find these in Scripture?

Former Protestant here. My craving for Christ lead me to the Catholic church. Protestantism could not fulfill my desire for Christ but the Catholic church does.

@JurassicMike @JDiamatti @Isabelletkrause

@JDiamatti @Isabelletkrause Demons are as real as Santa Claus, moron. I'm just a guy who is sick of ignorant people mouthing off.

"Hosanna" means "save us." But when Jesus didn't save them the way they expected, the same crowd chose "Crucify Him." It's easy to worship God when He fits into our plans but real faith is surrendering your will for His.

@ChrissieMayr I went with Joseph so I voted for Mary 😁

CATHOLIC TWITTER: What should my confirmation name be?

@trenton_vet @skyfoil_exe It's not that they can't get into Heaven, they leave it to God's divine mercy. This is in the Catechism. Yes, praying for the dead is an act of charity.

@skyfoil_exe Do Catholics believe in praying for the dead and that an unbaptized child that dies an hour after birth cannot get into Heaven?

@Stevieb8081 @skyfoil_exe What standard do you use to confirm its teachings are not truly grounded in Scripture?

@skyfoil_exe Hmm ok. Can I ask, how do you determine that the Catholic Church represents the “fullness” of the faith? What standard do you use to confirm its teachings are truly grounded in Scripture rather than later developments?

@MMash3204 @thattradgal That's not true, they didn't just quote Jesus. Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr went into detailed explanations on this. They were unanimously realists on this for several centuries. Who are these early fathers that were split? Clement? Origen? St Augustine?

@ebound @thattradgal This isn’t true. The early fathers were also split on this. It just didn’t matter. It was clear we were to keep meeting and breaking bread together. They only every quoted Jesus. They never said what they thought it meant but from their actions we can understand.

@GrandMosk @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal He's simply repeating what he learned from John. He's not talking about a thanksgiving ceremony, he's specifically talking about the flesh of our Savior.

@GrandMosk @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal 1 Corinthians 11 St. Paul distinguishes between the meal and the Lord's Supper. He's saying they're guilty of the body and blood because they don't discern the body. The focus is on the elements. Why would Ignatius in the lion's den be worried about institutional power? 🥴

@GrandMosk @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal The narrative break could've been 5 min, that doesn't matter. V60 says "when they heard this", which references everything before. Why would they wait all of that time to say "this is a hard saying" if they weren't referencing that specifically?

Assertions like this is why I left Catholicism: "He's using the Ascension to validate his authority." He's doing no such thing. Verse 59 is a narrative break: "59 These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum." Up though v58 he was addressing the crowd that had been fed by the fish and loaves the previous day, a "great multitude". (John 6:5) In v60, Jesus is debriefing with His disciples, as He often did after addressing the public. The text doesn't tell us if this was immediately after his public comments in the synagogue or later. At this briefing, Jesus was again directly addressing the complaints and murmuring that had been present earlier among the crowd. The "hard saying" that caused murmuring is captured here: "41 The Jews then complained about Him, because He said, “I am the bread which came down from heaven.” 42 And they said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it then that He says, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 43 Jesus therefore answered and said to them, “Do not murmur among yourselves." 1/

Probably one of the better April Fool's jokes with insanely good costume design Warhammer 40k Musical

@GrandMosk @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal He's using the Ascension to validate his authority. Obviously if he has the power to ascend into heaven, he has the power to give his flesh as food. Their simple logic is too small for the reality of who he really is, so this just reinforces his point. Now your turn.

I'll answer your question if you can tell me why you think the "hard" saying" dealt with eating his flesh when Jesus says this: 60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, “This is a hard saying; who can understand it?” 61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before?" What does v62 have to do with "eating His flesh"?

@GrandMosk @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal So you think for the first 1500 years of the church they just "got it wrong"? St. Ignatius wrote in 110AD "They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins."

Catholics need to read John 6 more carefully. Verse 59 is a narrative break. In the subsequent discussion, Jesus directly addresses the “hard saying” (v61-62), which is that Jesus came down from heaven. His response has nothing to do with eating his flesh. The issue was blasphemy, not cannibalism. Jesus was directly responding to verses 38-42.

@AZSenateGOP Waiting for the libs to tell me this is bad actually 🙃

🚨 JUST IN: BILL SIGNED INTO LAW Dangerous criminals deemed incompetent to stand trial will no longer slip through the cracks and be released back into Arizona communities. HB 2307 closes a major gap in state law by ensuring these individuals are placed in a secure setting when no beds are available — protecting public safety and holding the system accountable. ✔️ Passed with broad bipartisan support ✔️ Sponsored by @Leo4AzSenate ✔️ Strengthened by @SenatorAngius' amendment No more excuses. Public safety comes first. Read more: azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/…

@Brian_Murray111 @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal It sounds like you have some things you'd like to research on this topic. I'd advise you to start from the beginning and realize that the metaphorical interpretation of this didn't come about until the Protestant reformation some 1500 years or so later. Have a great Easter!

@ebound @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal How is your soul nourished by eating flesh and drinking blood?

@dyecaster @Noremac_Ma_i @thattradgal If that was the only verse, you might have a point. Consider that this was how it was interpreted from the beginning of Christianity. Have a Happy Easter!

@ebound @Noremac_Ma_i @thattradgal Because they didn’t have eyes to see an ears to here. Or… was that literal too? 🤭

@Brian_Murray111 @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal Keep wiggling around and trying to deflect 👍

@ebound @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal I’m starting to think that you do not understand the term metaphor.

@Brian_Murray111 @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal I'm not missing that at all, you're just missing the delivery of that nourishment of the soul. Again, this is how it was interpreted from the start...

@ebound @Ramandu_Star @thattradgal I think you are missing the overall spiritual significance of what Jesus was saying here. He was not talking about nourishing the body, but the soul!